r 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


1.0 


1.1 


11.25 


1^128     |2^ 

Ui  l&i  12.2 
ISf  HA  ~ 
!£   y£    12-0 

U    ILd 


FhDtDgra[iiic 

Sciences 

Corporation 


23  WBT  MAIN  STUiT 

WnSTIR,N.Y.  145t0 

(716)  •72-4503 


»', 


CIHM/ICMH 
Collection  de 
microfiches. 


Technical  and  Bibliographic  Notes/Notes  techniques  et  bibliographiques 


The  Institute  has  attempted  to  obtain  the  best 
original  copy  available  for  filming.  Features  of  this 
copy  which  may  be  bibliographically  unique, 
which  may  alter  any  of  the  images  in  the 
reproduction,  or  which  may  significantly  change 
the  usual  method  of  filming,  are  checked  below. 


D 


D 
D 


D 


D 


Coloured  covers/ 
Couverture  de  couleur 


pn    Covers  damaged/ 


Couverture  endommag6e 


r~n   Covers  restored  and/or  laminated/ 


Couverture  restaur6e  et/ou  peiiiculAe 

Cover  title  missing/ 

Le  titre  de  couverture  manque 


^ 


I      I    Coloured  maps/ 


Cartes  g^ographiques  en  couleur 

Coloured  ink  (i.e.  other  than  blue  or  black)/ 
Encre  de  couleur  (i.e.  autre  que  bleue  ou  noire) 


I      I    Coloured  plates  and/or  illustrations/ 


Planches  et/ou  illustrations  en  couleur 

Bound  with  other  material/ 
Reli6  avec  d'autres  documents 

Tight  binding  may  cause  shadows  or  distortion 
along  interior  margin/ 

La  reiiure  serrde  peut  causer  de  I'ombre  ou  de  la 
distortion  le  long  de  la  marge  int^rieure 

Blank  leaves  added  during  restoration  may 
appear  within  the  text.  Whenever  possible,  these 
have  been  omitted  from  filming/ 
11  se  peut  que  certaines  pages  blanches  ajout^es 
lore  d'une  restauration  apparaissent  dans  le  texte, 
mais,  iorsque  cela  6tait  possible,  ces  pages  n'ont 
pas  6t6  film^es. 

Additional  comments:/ 
Commentaires  suppi^mentaires: 


L'Institut  a  microfilm^  le  meilleur  exemplaire 
qu'il  lui  a  6t6  possible  de  se  procurer.  Les  details 
de  cet  exemplaire  qui  sont  peut-Atre  uniques  du 
point  de  vue  bibliographique,  qui  peuvent  modifier 
une  image  reproduite,  ou  qui  peuvent  exiger  une 
modification  dans  la  mAthode  normale  de  filmage 
sont  indiqu6s  ci-dessous. 


I      I   Coloured  pages/ 


D 
D 


Pages  de  couleur 

Pages  damaged/ 
Pages  endommag6es 

Pages  restored  and/oi 

Pages  restaur^es  et/ou  pellicul6es 

Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxe( 
Pages  d^colordes,  tachet^es  ou  piqutes 

Pages  detached/ 
Pages  d^tachdes 

Showthrough/ 
Transparence 

Quality  of  priri 

Qualiti  in^gaie  de  I'impression 

Includes  supplementary  materii 
Comprrnd  du  materiel  suppl^mentaire 


I — I  Pages  damaged/ 

I     I  Pages  restored  and/or  laminated/ 

I     I  Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxed/ 

I     I  Pages  detached/ 

[~n  Showthrough/ 

I      I  Quality  of  print  varies/ 

I     I  Includes  supplementary  material/ 


Only  edition  available/ 
Seule  Mition  disponible 

Pages  wholly  or  partially  obscured  by  errata 
slips,  tissues,  etc.,  have  been  refilmed  to 
ensure  the  best  possible  image/ 
Les  pages  totalement  ou  partiellement 
obscurcies  par  un  feuillet  d'errata,  une  pelure, 
etc.,  ont  M  fiimdes  d  nouveau  de  fa^on  A 
obtenir  la  meilleure  image  possible. 


This  item  is  filmed  at  the  reduction  ratio  checked  below/ 

Ce  document  est  fiim6  au  taux  de  rMuction  indiquA  ci-dessous. 

10X  14X  18X  22X 


26X 


30X 


y 


12X 


16X 


20X 


24X 


28X 


32X 


e 

6tails 
8  du 
lodifier 
r  une 
Image 


The  copy  filmed  here  has  been  reproduced  thanks 
to  the  generosity  of : 

Library  of  Congress 
Photoduplication  Service 

The  images  appearing  here  are  the  best  quality 
possible  considering  the  condition  and  legibility 
of  the  original  copy  and  in  keeping  with  the 
filming  contract  specifications. 


L'exemplaire  filmA  fut  reproduit  grdce  d  la 
gAn^rositA  de: 

Library  of  Congress 
Photoduplication  Service 

Les  images  suivantes  ont  6t6  reproduites  avec  le 
plus  grand  soin,  compte  tenu  de  la  condition  et 
de  la  nettet6  de  l'exemplaire  film6,  et  en 
conformity  avec  les  conditions  du  contrat  de 
filmage. 


IS 


Original  copies  in  printed  paper  covers  are  filmed 
beginning  with  the  front  cover  and  ending  on 
the  last  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, or  the  back  cover  when  appropriate.  All 
other  original  copies  are  filmed  beginning  on  the 
first  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  Impres- 
sion, and  ending  on  the  last  page  with  a  printed 
or  illustrated  impression. 


The  last  recorded  frame  on  each  microfiche 
shall  contain  the  symbol  '-^(meaning  "CON- 
TINUED"), or  the  symbol  V  (meaning  "END"), 
whichever  applies. 

Maps,  plates,  charts,  e^,  may  be  filmed  at 
different  reduction  ratios.  Those  too  large  to  be 
entirely  included  in  one  exposure  are  filmed 
beginning  in  the  upper  left  hand  corner,  left  to 
right  and  top  to  bottom,  as  many  frames  as 
required.  The  following  diagrams  illustrate  the 
method: 


Les  exemplaires  originaux  dont  la  couverture  en 
papier  est  ImprimAe  sont  film6s  en  commengant 
par  le  premier  plat  et  en  terminant  soit  par  la 
dernlAre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'Impression  ou  d'iilustration,  soit  par  le  second 
plat,  selon  le  cas.  Tous  les  autres  exemplaires 
originaux  sont  filmfo  en  commenpant  par  la 
premiere  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'Impression  ou  d'iilustration  et  en  terminant  par 
la  dernidre  page  qui  comporte  une  telle 
empreinte. 

Un  das  symboies  suivants  apparaftra  sur  la 
dernidre  image  de  cheque  microfiche,  selon  le 
cas:  le  symbols  — ►  signifie  ">\^SUIVRE  ",  le 
symbols  V  signifie  "FIN  ". 

Les  cartes,  planches,  tableaux,  etc.,  peuvent  Atre 
fllmfo  A  des  taux  de  reduction  diffArents. 
Lorsque  le  document  est  trop  grand  pour  Atre 
reproduit  en  un  seul  clichA,  ii  est  fllmA  A  partir 
de  Tangle  supArieur  gauche,  de  gauche  A  droite, 
et  de  haut  en  bas,  en  prenant  le  nombre 
d'images  nAcessaire.  Les  diagrammes  suivants 
lllustrent  la  mAthode. 


errata 
to 


pelure, 
>n  A 


n 

32X 


1  2  3 


1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

'■■  '**«**wi*wsWtt«gi«ei«aK^S^  =  ■■ 


V9 
ft 

i 


4 


SPEECH 

OF 

HON.  JUSTIN  S.  MORRILL. 


Mr.  MORRILL,  of  Vermont,  said: 

Mr.  Pkksidrnt  :  I  am  quite  aware  that  any  one  who  undertakes  to 
discuss  tliis  grave  matter  of  the  reciprocity  treaty  witli  the  Ciiuadas 
unght  to  feel  some  cuutidence  tliat  he  can  shed  some  little  lii^ht  upon 
the  subject;  but  I  am  ready  to  confess  that  I  expect  the  chief  inter- 
est in  the  subject  will  be  in  the  change  made  from  the  topic  that  has 
80  lonK  been  under  discussion  in  the  Senate.  I  ask  the  Secretary  to 
road  the  two  first  resolutions  of  the  Legislature  of  the  State  of  Ver- 
mont. 

The  Chief  Clerk  read  as  follows : 

SMolved  by  the  intate  ani  Koutt  of  reprttentaHtet,  That,  biiTing  an  inteUisont  re- 
gard for  the  best  interests  of  Vennont,  as  well  as  the  whole  country,  it  is  the  dnty 
of  onr  Senators  and  Representatives  in  Congress  to  use  their  inflnenoo  against  the 
onnHiimmation  of  any  treaty  relating  to  reciprocity  in  trade  with  the  Doininion  of 
Canada,  and  to  iuHist  that  the  subject  ot  trade  and  commercial  iutercourae  with 
Canwla.  as  well  as  with  all  other  foreign  conntrieg,  is  not  a  proper  matter  of  treaty 
stipulation,  bnt  belongs  to  Congress,  and  should  be  wisely  regulated  by  Judicious 
lefaslation. 

Kemlved,  That  in  common  with  the  Canadian  people  wo  earnestly  desire  and 
hope  for  the  early  completion  of  the  8hip.«anal  connecting  the  waters  of  the  Saint 
Lawrence  and  Iludson  Bivers  with  Lake  Ghamplain,  as  forming  au  important  line 
of  communication  between  the  great  cities  on  the  Atlantic  sea-board  and  the  grain 
imd  lumber  regions  of  Canada  and  the  Northwest,  and  in  this  work  we  invito  the 
oo-operation  respectively  of  the  govemments  of  the  Dominion  of  Canada  and  the 
United  States. 

Mr.  MORRILL,  of  Vermont.  These  resolutions  bein^  public  reso 
Intious,  and  the  proposal  for  the  treaty  with  the  Canadian  Dominion 
having  been  made  public,  or  the  imunction  of  secrecy  removed  from 
it  and  from  all  the  papers  in  relation  thereto,  I  fcul  that  I  shall  not 
transcend  the  propneties  of  the  occasion  in  discussing  the  proposal 
for  a  reciprocity  treaty  with  Canada.  I  shall  in  the  &e,t  part  of  my 
remarks  refer  to  the  effects  that  such  a  treaty  would  have  upon  the 
ciuestion  of  annexation,  then  to  the  fact  that  we  have  no  revenue  to 
spare,  to  the  effect  that  it  will  have  upon  onr  national  power  if  we 
snould  agree  to  a  treaty  that  would  bind  us  to  keep  the  peace  for 
twenty-four  years.  Then  I  shall  endeavor  to  discuss  the  constitu- 
tional question,  so  far  as  it  relates  to  the  right  of  Congress  "to  reg- 
ulate commerce  with  foreign  nations  and  among  the  several  States 
and  with  the  Indian  tribes,"  and  the  power  of  the  President  and 
Senate  to  interfere  with  the  prerogative  of  the  House  of  Representa- 
tives to  originate  revenue  bills.  1  shall  then  refer  to  the  effect  it 
will  have  upon  the  agricultural  interests  of  this  country,  the  fisheries, 
manufactures,  and  itmuggliug ;  and  from  all  of  these  points  I  hope 
to  be  able  to  show  uhat  the  treaty  would  be  a  very  bad  bargain. 


The  ahmgnted  reciprocity  treaty  with  Grout  Britain,  relating  to 
her  Caniulian  dominions,  having  proved  ]>rolitable  to  our  northern 
neighbors  itnd  unprotitable  to  uit,  it  is  not  wonderful  that  they  sliould 
seek  in  some  form  an  early  renewal  of  its  advantageouH  conditions, 
nor  is  it  wonderful  that  we  should  scan  fresh  proposals  from  that 
quarter  with  distrust. 

The  Doniinitm  government  maintained  dnrins  the  last  session  of 
Congress  a  confidential  embassy  at  Washington  to  manufacture  or  to 
create  a  public  opinion  at  onr  Capitol,  through  diligent  diplomacy 
and  diligent  use  of  the  pnblic  press,  in  favor  of  a  new  reciprocity 
treaty;  and  with  so  muoh  success  that  the  project,  with  all  the  foo- 
tttres  of  its  Canadian  parentage  and  British  baptism,  was  at  length  sub- 
mitted by  the  President,  as  the  public  have  been  informed,  to  the 
Senate  for  its  advice^  It  was  sent,  like  the  first  treaty  of  Washing- 
ton, not  for  our  consent,  but  only  for  onr  advice,  whether  favorable 
or  unfavoral)le. 

It  was  a  high  gratification  to  observe,  while  examining  the  details 
of  the  proposed  treaty  and  its  exclusively  foreign  origin,  that  the 
Secretary  of  State  only  formally  delivered  it  to  the  President  and 
left  it  without  a  word  of  official  commendation,  as  though  he  was 
glad  to  be  rid  of  an  unprofitable  ceremony.  The  Presiclent  of  the 
United  States,  bound  as  he  is  by  national  and  diplomatic  comity  to 
treat  communications  from  foreign  nations  with  dignified  respect, 
transmitted  the  proposal  to  the  Senate,  manifesting  no  marked  par- 
tiality for  the  measure,  but,  while  earnestly  asking  for  the  opinion  of 
the  Senate,  frankly  declared  that  he  was  not  himself  prepared  to  say 
anything  respecting  its  merits.  For  myself,  not  being  able  to  find 
merits,  I  shall  say  something  npon  its  demerits,  and  attempt  to  show 
that  for  what  we  are  to  grant  there  is  no  adequate  com]>ensation  in 
any  of  the  provisions  tendered,  and  that  their  charact«r,  though 
much  confused,  cannot  be  hidden  by  being  huddled  together  in  the 
form  of  a  treaty. 

While  considering  any  new  reciprocity  i)ropo8als  the  effect  of  the 
old  treaty  should  be  constantly  borne  in  mind.  Our  exports  to  Can- 
ada in  1855  were  $20,&i8,S76,  but  in  twelve  years  under  the  operation 
of  "reciprocity,"  or  in  1866,  they  had  fallen  to  915,243,834— sho>r- 
ing  a  positive  decrease  of  over  15,000,000.  Yet  the  exports  of  Can- 
ada to  the  United  States  during  the  same  time,  wliich  were  in  1865 
only  $12,182,314,  had  increased  in  1B66  to  $46, 199,470.  The  ^ross  ine- 
qiwlity  therefore  was  enormous.  We  furnished  to  them  in  twelve 
years  under  the  treaty  a  free  mu'ket  for  Canadian  prodncts  to  the 
amount  of  $239,000,000,  but  in  return  the  Canadas  only  gave  a  free 
market  to  American  products  to  the  extent  of  |124,000,w)0.  When 
the  treaty  began  the  balance  of  trade  was  eight  millions  annually  in 
onr  favor,  and  at  the  end  the  balance  to  be  paid  in  specie  was  thirty 
millions  in  one  year  against  us.  That  was  a  reciprocity  which  can- 
not be  dwelt  npon  with  composure,  or  that  we  can  afford  to  have 
repeated. 

AKKKXATIOM. 

One  of  the  collateral  qnestiooa  that  will  at  the  outset  obtrnde  itself 
in  the  discussion  of  this  treaty  is  that  of  the  fnture  annexation  of 
the  entire  country  on  our  northern  border.  That  it  would  be  in  many 
of  its  aspects— civil,  military,  and  flnancial^onvenient,  is  not  to  he 
doubted.  The  large  sums  now  mutually  expended  for  deiense  against 
future  possible  border  collisions  and  for  paraltel  lines  of  revenue 
offices  would  be  wholly  saved  and  serve  to  augment  the  amount 
which  each  and  every  man  of  the  respective  countries  could  retain 


wmmmtmm 


rolatinff  to 
ir  northern 
boy  should 
coiiditionH, 
from  that 

t  session  of 
actnro  or  to 
diplomacy 
reciprocity 
all  the  fea- 
length  sub- 
meet,  to  the 
f  Washins- 
Br  favorabl© 

X  the  details 
;in,  that  the 
esident  and 
tush  he  was 
iclent  of  the 
io  comity  to 
tied  respect, 
marked  par- 
te opinion  of 
ipared  to  say 
;  able  to  find 
irapt  to  show 
ipenHation  in 
lUter,  thoueh 
gether  in  the 

effect  of  the 
ports  to  Can- 
fche  operation 
13,834— abo:w- 
ports  of  Can- 
were  in  1855 
Che  gross  ine- 
em  m  twelve 
)dnct8  to  the 
y  gave  a  free 
0,000.  When 
IS  annually  in 
;io  was  thirty 
ty  which  cau- 
hfford  to  have 


;obtrnde  itself 
annexation  of 
tld  be  in  many 
it,  is  not  to  ho 
etense  against 
es  of  revenue 
t  the  amount 
s  could  retain 


from  the  prodnots  of  his  own  labor.  Rogties  wonid  find  no  unnrtnary 
by  fleeiiig  acrossa  boundary  lino.  There  wonld  belittitt  riMl<  in  trust- 
ing a  people,  whore  branuhosof  our  own  race  and  langutij;<>  iirc  dom- 
inant, to  mingle  and  co-operate  in  our  systomof  self-govurnnifnt,  and 
we  are  by  no  means  "  so  near  of  kin  that  we  can  never  be  imitod." 
Local  liberty  and  local  organization  wonld  be  proHorvod.  Hut  the 
advantages  to  them  would  be  infinitely  superior  to  all  that  would  ever 
accrue  to  us.  The  constable  would  take  the  place  of  thoir  Htandiug 
army.  The  fear  of  bocondng  the  American  cock-pit  in  caHo  of  a  war 
with  Groat  Britain  would  bo  disjiellod,  and  the  CanadnH  would  not 
only  enjoy  romplote  reciprocity,  but  would  bo  our  latest  and  voungost 
puts,  to  wimm  tlio  most  liberal  national  appropriations  for  all  needful 
improvements  would  not  be  refused.  Their  forests  and  unoccnjiied 
fields,  their  mines  and  vacant  mill  privileges,  would  attract  the  cai>- 
tains  of  industry  and  tempt  the  capital  of  our  whole  peoplo.  Even 
the  smallest  of  our  States  would  furnish  ctioutive  ro-ontor(;emonts. 
The  deposits  in  the  savings-banks  of  Rhode  Island  alone  arc  nearly 
equal  to  the  entire  banking  capital  of  the  whole  Canadian  dominion. 

Our  own  territory,  however,  is  sufHciently  large  to  hold  all  the 
population  of  a  tirst-rate  power  among  nations,  including  tlio  accro- 
tions  of  future  centuries,  and  we  have  a  soil  and  climate  .so  broad  and 
various  as  to  furnish  all  the  chief  products  reqnired  by  the  most  ad- 
vanced civilization.  Any  future  territorial  additions  would  add  little 
to  our  felicity  and  nothing  to  our  prosperity  or  security;  and  yet  no 
one  can  be  entirely  deaf  to  the  voice  of  political  prophets  or  <lony  that 
manifest  destiny  jiersists  In  pointing  out  with  an  unmoving  ilnger 
that  one  flag  must  ultimately  cover  and  protect  all  Americans  who 
speak  the  same  language,  and  whose  highest  <lovolopmont  possibly 
awaits  that  crowning  event.  The  remote  and  varied  interests  of  the 
different  parts  of  the  British  possessions,  sundered  as  they  are  by  mag- 
nificent distances,  by  unexplored  wildernesses,  by  mountains,  and  by 
oceans,  lakes,  and  rivers,  or  in  winter  by  seas  of  ice,  will  forever 
prompt  a  closer  American  combination.  But  American  statesmen, 
unlike  those  of  the  European  continent,  should  do  nothing  to  force  or 
unduly  hasten  such  a  combination,  and  certainly  should  do  nothing 
to  absolutely  bar  or  retard  it  by  a  losing  and  paltry  substitute  for  it 
in  the  form  of  a  rociitrocity  treaty.  Patriotism  requires  that  we 
should  study  the  most  exalteil  interests  of  our  own  peoplo,  and  these 
interests  would  be  jeopunlized,  as  it  seems  to  mo,  and  certainly  the 
collateral  question  of  auuexation  indefinitely  postponed,  by  treating 
the  CanadiiMi  dominion  with  more  favor  than  we  treat  any  other  for- 
eign domiiiiiiu.  Nor  does  it  belong  to  us  to  allay  the  discontents  of 
any  outlying  provinces  of  Great  Britain  by  remitting  duties  which 
they  now  rightfully  pa'  .id  by  throwing  both  the  burden  and  dis- 
content upon  our  own  j.  ■  ^i^i!". 

It  is  noA^  said,  as  it  was  .  s  1844,  "  make  the  i-eciprocity  treaty,  and 
Canadian  annexation  is  OLly  a  question  of- time."  That  might  bo 
proclaimed  with  equal  fluency,  au4  with  the  added  force  of  some 
possible  grains  of  truth,  in  the  negative  form,  by  saying  "  no  ti'iMity, 
and  annexation  is  only  a  question  of  time;"  but  our  Republic,  having 
the  vantage-ground  of  absolute  independence,  should  stand  on  its 
own  self-respect  and  yield  nothing  in  advance  to  vague  hints  of  a 
donbtfnl  future  nuptial  ceremony.  The  idea  that  annexation  would 
be  the  logical  sequence  of  reciprocity  is  not  only  absnrd,  but  has 
been  thoroughly  exploded  by  our  past  experience  as  a  weak  delusion, 
and  as  flickering  as  the  aurora  borealis,  vrMch  vanishes  with  the  first 
streak  of  morning  light.    Canadians  are  not  yet  republicans,  and 


6 


very  feebly  yearn  for  their  own  national  inilepcn(lonc«.  Their  devo- 
tion to  royalty — of  which  wo  do  not  complain— ia  ntrong,  becuiiH<<.  it 
ia  afar  on,  and  is  only  lesa  than  their  loyalty  to  the  pursuit  of  gnin. 
What  more  do  they  (It'siro,  now  havinff  a  cheap  market  tr»m  whii-li 
to  buy,  than  a  dear  market  in  which  to  aell,  or  than  hiicIi  relations 
with  the  United  States  aa  will  secure  i^reatcr  commercial  proaperity 
without  any  of  the  incidents  and  responsibilities  of  annexation  f  It 
is  clearly  the  greed  of  trade  which  now  promjits  our  nelghl)orN,  who 
evidently  are  not  inspired  by  the  ambition  which  makes  men  dare  to 
bo  masters  of  their  own  fate. 

Oo«hI  farming  lands  within  the  bonndaries  of  the  United  States  sell 
now  for  more  than  twice  as  nnich  per  acre  as  land  of  e(|ua1  fertility 
not  half  a  mile  distant  in  the  Canadian  dimilnlon.  If  the  chief  Indus- 
tries of  the  Canudas  could  be  made  more  profitable,  n^al  0Htat«  there, 
improved  and  unimproved,  would  quickly  advance  in  value,  and  the 
Ciinadas  would  not  only  escape  the  danger  of  depopulation  from  the 
emigration  now  going  on  of  their  own  people,  but  a  much  larger  pro- 
portion of  the  foreign  immigrants  landingat  Quebec  would  be  nitalned 
instead  of  swiftly  crossing  to  the  United  States. 

These  results  they  might  secure,  and  all  at  our  cost,  by  the  proposed 
treaty;  the  loftier  their  flight  the  more  humble  our  own.  But  our 
experience  under  the  abrogated  treaty,  confessedly  too  favorable  to 
the  Canadians  and  most  onerous  to  the  people  of  the  United  States, 
shows  that,  so  far  as  they  are  concerned,  snch  a  treaty  does  not  warm 
the  affections  nor  increase  the  respect  of  the  colder  regions  of  the 
north,  where  it  was  only  a  gainful  bargain  adroitly  Interpreted,  and 
had  neither  power  to  create  nor  to  per])etimte  an  era  of  good-will  as 
the  precursor  of  annexation.  It  was  rather  like  the  feast  of  Barme- 
cide in  the  Arabian  Nights,  where  the  visitor  was  put  oft'  with  calling 
for  exquisite  viands  that  never  appeared,  and  with  the  solitary  honor 
of  the  company  of  the  host.  Annexation  may  have  Iteen  on  the  bill 
of  fare  and  called  for,  but  it  did  not  appear,  and  we  had  the  cool  and 
hungry  honor  of  treating  with  a  distinguished  host. 

From  1861  to  186.5,  notwithstanding  the  supposed  genial  influen  d 
generated  by  recipnicity  in  the  hour  of  its  supremest  strength  an 
fruition,  Canadian  amity  was  truly  "  a  peace  which  passeth  all  under- 
standing;" and  there  was  hardly  any  greater  malevolence  exhibited 
toward  the  United  States  than  that  so  oll'ensively  displayed  by  the 
ruling  spirits  of  the  Cana^lian  doiAinion. 

ThAy  coldly  calculated  the  profit  and  loss  of  planting  thorns  in  our 
bleeding  sides,  and  saw  with  exultation  both  the  South  and  the  North 
each  grow  weaker  by  loss  of  blood.  They  vainly  hoped  our  growth 
and  greatness  would  be  curbed  and  our  glories  dimmed.  Not  that  they 
most  hated  the  North,  but  that  they  hated  the  Union,  and  would  love 
us  better  in  smaller  and  broken  parcels. 

Let  us  not  be  deceived  by  the  present  commercial  caresses  of  our 
Canadian  friends.  They  seek  to  extinguish  the  memory  of  former 
injuries,  not  by  benefits  they  are  to  confer,  but  possibly  by  tlie  favoi-s 
they  are  to  receive.  They  seem  to  think  we  ought  to  discover  that 
annexation  is  but  a  little  way  «ff  from  reciprocity ;  but  this  bait  is 
growing  stale  and  has  strongly  scented  the  old  trap.  The  ass,  we  are 
told,  did  not  overtake  the  bundle  of  hay  fastened  to  the  end  of  the 
pole  in  his  front,  though  with  longing  eyes  he  tugged  and  toiled  for 
speedy  "annexation."  Reciprocity,  formerly  a  word  of  deceitful 
sweetness,  has  turned  out  a  bitter-sweet,  the  smart  from  which  leaves 
no  relish  for  a  second  taste.  The  song  of  the  siren  may  have  betrayed 
us  once,  but  there  is  ho  power  to  charm  in  its  "  damnable  iteration." 


Tlioir  dov<»- 
g,  bncmiHit  it 
suit  of  gttUx. 

from  whicli 
iich  i'<«latioii8 
nl  i»roHpority 
oxatioii  f  It 
ighlioi'H,  who 

moil  dart)  to 

(1(1  States  sell 
liial  fertility 
in  chief  iiulns- 
eHtat«  thcro, 
aliio,  and  the 
tUm  from  the 
ell  larger  pro- 
ildberutaimirt 

'  the  proposed 
wii.  But  our 
favorable  to 
Jnited  States, 
Iocs  not  warm 
re;riouH  of  the 
terprotcd,  and 
if  jjoixl-will  as 
mst  (if  liarmo- 
>tf  with  calling 
» solitary  honor 
«en  on  the  bill 
ad  tho  cool  and 

mial  inflnen  d 
t  strength  an 
iBcth  all  nnder- 
enco  exhibited 
splayed  by  the 

g  thorns  inonr 
1  and  the  North 
led  our  growth 
Not  that  they 
ind  would  love 

iaresses  of  our 
tuory  of  former 
ly  by  the  favoi-s 
I  discover  that 
at  this  bait  is 
The  ass,  we  are 
I  the  end  of  the 
and  toiled  for 
d  of  deceitfnl 
ni  -which  leaves 
r  have  betrayed 
Eible  iteration." 


miiiiii 


Tin?  THP.ATY  TO  nlNB  us  TWBNTT-FOL'B  VKAIM. 

The  proposed  treaty,  if  made,  is  to  endure  for  twenty-one  yean, 
and  then  can  (mly  be  terminated  after  three  years'  notiee.  It  is 
therefore  to  endure  solidly,  happen  what  may.  peace  or  war,  twenty- 
four  years  as  the  very  shortest  time  of  irrepealable  validity.  Sudden 
and  wholly  unforeseen  events  have  more  than  once  within  the  last 
decade  bnuiglit  us  to  the  very  brink  of  war  With  nations  of  formhla- 
ble  power,  and  who  can  guarantee  twcaty-four  years  of  unintermpt(Ml 
peace  f  In  the  dullest  and  most  quiet  ((iiarter  of  the  globe  such  n 
guarantee  would  be  reckoned  a  haxanlous  risk,  and  cannot  Ih)  other- 
wise in  our  own  fast-going  and  many-sided  country.  Our  neighbors, 
the  governments  of  Mexico  and  of  South  America,  seem  to  be  basetl 

Xn  volcanic  foundations,  and  are  subject  to  the  explosions  and  peri- 
sal  disturbances  of  war  and  revolutions.  China  and  Japan,  ns  the 
first  step  in  a  higher  civili/.ation,  seek  scientiflc  inBtruction  in  the 
most  destructive  art  of  war.  Russia,  with  oriental  ambition,  is  push- 
ing, ever  pushing  eastward  across  the  plains  of  Asia,  and  also  impa- 
tiently waiting  fur  a  golden  opportunity  to  seize  the  Golden  Horn  of 
the  liosphorus;  and  the  Sultan,  that  sick  man  of  the  East,  is  watch- 
ing his  alert  and  suspiciously  independent  Khedive  of  Egypt.  In 
France  the  empire,  the  monanthy,  and  the  n'piiblic  by  turns  tJirottle 
each  other,  au(l  the  army,  as  in  the  davs  of  the  Ciesarn,  may  ultimately 
fling  the  swonl  into  the  balance.  Bismarck  is  dcHlging  the  bulls  of 
the  Pope  and  the  balls  of  assassins,  but  ready  at  a  moment's  notice 
to  snatch  any  tempting  provinces  left  out  overnight  in  the  cold,  and 
equally  ready  to  Humin(ni  Germany  to  play  the  rubber  game  with 
France.  The  new  repnblic  of  Spain,  after  bravely  fighting  for  free- 
dom, readily  accepts  a  monarchy,  if  it  bo  Alfonso  with  an  ''f,"  while 
Cuba  wages  a  cruel  war  under  any  flag  that  covers  slavery.  The 
Pope  is  trying  to  extend  his  spiritual  dictatorship  as  some  compen- 
sation for  the  loss  of  temporal  power.  Denmark,  Belgium,  Holland, 
and  Luxembourg,  stand  trembling  as  they  behold  their  natural  ene- 
mies hovering  above  them  and  only  waiting  a  fit  occasion  to  swoop 
them  up  as  hawks  clutch  their  frightened  proy. 

Surely  the  outlook  is  one  of  dis(iuietude,  and  it  is  highly  improbable 
that  an  era  of  perpetnal  pence  has  yet  dawned.  All  ot  our  experience , 
early  and  late,  shows  that  in  time  of  war  an  increased  revenue  is  a 
vital  measure  of  success.  The  embarassments  of  18<{1,  in  consequence 
of  the  then  existing  reciprocity  treaty  of  1854,  were  of  an  aggravated 
character.  Large  sources  of  revenue  were  placed  beyond  our  reach, 
the  hands  of  legislators  were  partially  palsied,  and  no  American 
'statesman  should  again  consent  to  impose  such  an  evil-engendering 
treaty  upon  Congress  and  the  American  people.  Tho  recent  upheav- 
als and  the  present  unsatisfactory  coudition  of  affairs  in  Europe 
indicate,  as  some  of  their  most  astute  8tat«smen  have  announced, 
further  national  straggles  of  a  grave  character,  and  if  they  come,  we 
shall  not  want  to  l>e  shackled  and  bound  by  any  such  entangling 
alliances  as  are  most  absurdly  called  reciprocity  treaties.  Intending 
nothing  but  peace,  we  should  yet  scorn  to  give  bonds  that  under  no 
provocations  shall  there  be  war. .-  Our  position  should  be  strong 
enough  to  maintain  i>eace  and  neutrality,  and  so  strong  as  to  defy 
aggression.  We  cannot  afford  to  be  accounted  as  a  usetess  friend  or 
a  contemptible  enemy. 

Hampered  by  the  proposed  treaty,  should  any  great  emergency  sud- 
denly confront  us,  we  could  only  escape  from  impotoncy  bj-  its  vio- 
lent abrogation,  even  at  the  hazard  of  a  war  with  whomsoever  it 
might  concern,  and  thus  force  at  groat  cost  by  conquest  a  possible 


doMtiny.  wtiicli,  if  it  Ih  to  conic,  had  Itottcr  come  HpontniioniiHly  with 
g4MHl-\vtll  uiiil  witlumt  pricti.  Iixlvpc'iiilciit,  tl>o  Cniiuiliau  Uominioii 
Would  uot  Im!  uiiy  i-niiHe  of  dintriut;  it  would  have  no  furuiKU  quur- 
rclH  toeH|Miumt;  liut  un  n  depeudoucy  of  Oreat  Dritaiu  it  lieuoiuuit  the 
■oat  of  n  vonh)n  of  military  «Mit|ioHtM,  a  liriHtliiiK  itorpetual  uuinaco. 

Hhouhl  wo  accept  of  thin  reciprocity  treaty,  wliile  it  ntight  iimure 
tlio  aK^nuidizenieut  of  othen,  <mr  own  iK>wer  oh  a  natiou,  whether 
for  |M>aco  or  war,  for  defense  or  offenHo,  would  become  lew  efl'ective, 
loMH  formidable.  Our  itinewH  of  war  would  bo  cut  in  atlvance.  The 
treaty,  like  the  fintt  approach  of  dinease.  may  not  eoHily  be  fully- 
compndiondod,  although  the  remedy  Ih  |ilainly  in  our  own  handH; 
but  at  the  next  Htagu  evorylMHly  will  piiMtticully  comprehend  the 
evil,  while  the  remedy  will  be  out  of  our  reach  for  twenty-four  yearH. 
I  frankly  own  that  I  could  not  willingly  coiiHcnt  to  Hnu  my  country 
emliarraNMcd  by  hucIi  engagemeutH  for  twenty-four  houra,  and  niuoli 
IcKM  for  twenty-four  yearH. 

CompactH  l>etween  nationit,  like  bargaimt  l>etween  individuals,  are 
made  upon  no  other  prinoiides  than  that  of  idiarii-HiKhted  and  fully- 
enlightened  Helf-intercHt.  When  they  are  suppoHcd  to  be  ndvantageoiw 
they  are  made,  or,  if  otherwitie,  they  are  avoided.  CiruuniHtanceH 
jduL'c  it  out  *rf  the  power  of  the  Canodas  to  offer  oquivalentH  for  the 
privilogCM  they  Heek.  They  can  offer  nothing  better  and  will  accejtt 
of  nothing  worse.  Keciprocal  privilegen  in  the  markets  of  the  rcHpeot- 
ive  countries  would  bo  as  une<iukl  as  are  the  capabilities  of  New 
i'ork  and  QuoIm^c,  or  as  unequal  as  would  be  a  i-eciprocity  of  pasturage 
by  which  tlie  tlelds  and  iiratrios  of  the  United  States  Bhcnild  be  turned 
into  commouH  with  those  of  Caniula.  The  authors  of  such  husbandry, 
or  of  Huch  a  bargain,  would  most  appropriately  bo  fed  ou  tListles— 
Caniula  thistles. 

CONIITITUnO.VAL  OIUKCnO.NS. 

But  if  the  commercial  and  iwlitical  considerations  wore  in  our  favor 

instead  of  iMjing  stubbornly  otherwise,  the  paramount  and  determinate 

(ibjection  to  the  pi-oposed  reciprocity  treaty  is  imbedded  in  the  eon-* 

stitution  of  our  country,  and  i'  a  barrier  is  found  there  even  to  a 

'  good  treaty,  it  certainly  should  be  all  sufiBciont  against  a  bad  one. 

My  colleague  [Mr.  Edmunds]  upon  a  former  occasion  referred  to 
the  treaty  of  1794  with  Great  Britain,  commonly  called  the  Jay 
treaty,  as  though  that  was  a  precedent  for  reciprocity  treaties ;  but  I 
deny  that  that  treaty  bean  even  the  remotest  relation  to  reciprocity 
tivatie*.  It  required  the  legislative  action  of  the  House,  aa  have 
many  other  treaties,  and  the  House  very  properly  conceded  it,  but 
only  after  a  very  serious  and  prolonged  struggle.  Does  any  one  be- 
lieve that  the  House  would  have  consented  to  the  treaty  if  it  had  gone 
so  fnr  as  to  trench  upon  the  power  of  the  House  to  originat'O  revenue 
Mils  and  the  power  of  Couf^ess  to  regulate  commerce  or  to  prescribe 
the  articles  upon  which  duties  should  or  shonld  not  be  leviedf  Where 
tlie  treaty-maKing  power  has  Jurisdiction  the  House  must  assent,  but 
where  it  has  not,  such  assent  should  not  be  asked. 

No,  Mr.  President,  the  Senate  of  the  United  States  has  never  ad- 
vised and  ecmsentod  to  but  one  aeoiprocity  treaty,  and  that  was  the 
quickly  terminated  traaty  of  1864. 

The  proposed  treaty  assumes  the  principle  of  regulating  commei-ue 
and  of  radically  changing  our  tariff  system  of  raising  revenue,  so 
far  as  it  respects  the  imports  from  a  foreign  natiou,  and  what  uiav 
'  be  i)roperly  done  by  treaty  with  one  nation  may  be  done  with  all. 
The  first  article  of  section  8  of  the  Constitution  provides  that  Con- 
gress shall  have  power  "  to  regulate  commerce  with  foreign  nations, 


'oiwly  with 
duuiiiiioi) 

HiKii  ((liar- 
iudiuoM  the 

iiionnco, 
gkt  iimurtt 
u,  whothur 
eflV)ctlvo, 
unce.  Tlio 
be  fully- 
wii  liuiiilfi; 
rulionil  thu 
four  yeai-M. 
uy  couiiti'v 

aiid  iuiio)i 

triduab),  are 
hikI  fully- 
vaiitugeui'iH 
cuniHtttiici'H 
lilts  for  tilt) 
will  accpjit 
tbu  ruHpuct- 
L'S  of  N«w 
f  i>iMturu){t) 
<lbo  tiiriiud 
liimbiindry, 
u  ILiiitleH— 


in  our  favor 
letorminato 
in  the  con- ' 
9  even  to  a 
a  bad  one. 
referred  to 
9d  the  Jay 
tties;  but! 
reciprocity 
se,  as  have 
!ded  it,  but 
uiyoue  be- 
it  had  gone 
»t«  revenue 
to  prescribe 
odt  Whore 
assent,  but 

I  never  ad- 
lat  was  the 

;  commei-ue 
revenue,  so 
what  niay 
le  with  all. 
>  that  Cou- 
gu  nations, 


nnd  among  tho  ncvrrnl  Htatcs,  and  with  the  Indian  tribes."  This 
I'iM'tikiiily  titkt-n  the  Hiibjitut  of  rogiilntiiig  fotunit^i'i'o  itwiiy  from  thu 
trmity-iiiakiiig  power  and  lodgiis  R  uxrhiNivoly  with  ConttrcNM,  where 
it  in  to  bu  I'ontrolled  without  let  or  bliideraiic-e  forevitr.  TbiH  power 
of  Coiigi'i'MH  ciiniiot  l>e  HiiN)M!iided  for  one  day,  and  certainly  not  for 
twenty-four  yeai'H.  Kven  if  this  provJMbm  of  the  (.'oimtitution  had 
been  omitted,  It  woulil  Ite  an  inexjMtdient,  if  not  diiiiKeroim,  exeruise 
of  power,  under  a  republican  form  of  governiiieiit,  for  the  I'residiMit 
and  the  Henate  alone  to  undertake  to  regulate  the  collection  or  uou- 
eollection  of  revenue  by  treaty.  The  consent  for  the  time  of  a  placa- 
ble H<uiH0  of  HeproMtntativcH  would  be  a  ouniiing  expedient,  but  it 
would  ueitlior  change  nor  blot  imt  n  single  sentence  of  tli(«  Constitu- 
tion ;  and  such  consent,  if  obtained,  so  far  from  having  any  binding 
force  U|Mui  :\  Hucceoding  House,  would  have  no  more  valiie  than  would 
the  coiistMit  of  our  (Jhii>f  Justice,  or  of  the  man  in  tiie  moon.  To  such 
treaties  as  are  lawful  thu  advice  and  consent  of  the  House  is  iinnoces- 
Miry,  and  to  such  as  are  unlawful  its  consent  lends  nothing  but  im- 
poteney.  It  might  be  as  fairly  oontondod  that  thu  States  may  par- 
ticipate in  the  power  of  Congress  to  regulate  commerce  as  to  claim 
tliat  the  treaty-making  power  may  participate.  The  power  is  exclu- 
sive.   Story,  in  his  great  work  on  the  Constitutiim,  declares  : 

Full  power  to  roKiiliit4'  n  pnrtioiilur  Hiilijnot  Impllcn  tbo  wholu  |iowi*r,  nn<l  leaves 
iiu  iwiiiiluniii :  anil  a  cmiit  of  thu  whole  to  one  is  iuuouiptttiblo  with  a  grant  to 
another  of  u  part.    ( Voliniie  "J,  page  ri.) 

And  again  he  says  : 

A  power  K<v«n  by  tho  Corfstltntion  rannot  \w  conntrnoil  to  niithnrize  a  ticitmo- 
tlon  of  other  iKiwera  si  von  In  thoiiume  iun'n.  jieut.  It  niiiHt  be  conntruvd  there- 
fore in  Hulxiiilliuition  to  It ;  ami  cannot  HupvrHVile  or  Interfere  with  niiy  other  o{  Its 
fiindaniental  provUlona.  Kach  U  equally  obligatory  and  of  pnraiiiniiiit  authority 
within  ItttMcopoj  nnd  no  one  ombrocoa  a  right  to  annihilate  any  other.  (Volume 
'i,  page  376.) 

Another  authoritative  commentator  (Mr.  Duer)  on  tho  Constitution, 
in  relation  to  the  treaty-making  power  says  it  "  must  be  construed 
in  subordination  to  the  Constitution,  and  however  in  its  operation  it 
may  qualify,  it  cannot  supersede,  or  interfere,  with  any  of  its  funda- 
mental provisions,  nor  can  it  over  be  so  interpreted  as  to  destroy 
other  powers  granted  by  that  instrnment."  This  is  no  new  doctrine, 
but  it  seems  as  olearlv  stated  as  It  is  decisive  of  the  question. 

Treaties  madu  under  the  authority  of  tho  United  States  are  the 
supreme  law  of  tho  land,  anything  in  the  comtiMion  or  lawn  of  any  State 
notwithstan'Mng;  butmark,it  is  not  written  notwithstanding  the  Con- 
alitulMH  w  lawH  of  the  United  States.  It  was  foreseen  that  conflicts  might 
arise  with  Htate  constitutions  and  laws  in  force  prior  to  1769,  but 
it  was  not  intended  to  make  the  treaty-making  power  supreme  over 
Congress  and  above  the  Constitution  itself.  Tncre  was  no  unlimited 
or  desjiotic  power  given  to  the  President — two-thirds  of  the  Senate 
present  concurring.  The  authority  to  make  treaties  is  general  but 
necessarily  limitecf  by  exceptions  or  by  all  parts  of  the  Constitution 
which  disposes  of  power  elsewhere.  The  treaty-making  power  can- 
not exercise  legislative  power  anv  more  than  Judicial  or  executive. 
These  powers  have  been  all  coanded  to  other  and  different  hands. 
The  power  to  make  treaties  with  foreign  nations  does  not  include  tho 
power  to  lay  taxes  or  to  borrow  money,  which  no  more  fully  and  dis- 
tinctively belong  to  Congress  than  the  power  to  regulate  commerce.  If 
the  treaty-making  power  cannot  lay  taxes  or  duties,  it  cannot  re- 
peal or  modify  taxes  or  duties,  nor  make  a  trenty  by  which  it  may 
ever  become  unlawful  for  Congress  to  lay  taxes  or  duties  at  any  time 
and  in  any  form  sanctioned  by  the  Constitution.    lieciprocity  treaties 


wtm'WKmKm 


10 


pretendins  to  regulate  commerce  6an  no  more  be  the  snpreme  law  of 
the  land  than  were  the  ship-money  proclamatiouB  of  Charles  I,  be- 
cause there  is  no  authority  given  to  make  tliem.  The  power  of  Oon- 
gress  is  paramount  and  exclusive,  and  cannot  be  set  aside  by  any 
claim  in  behalf  of  the  omnipotence  of  a  treaty. 

Section  7  of  the  same  article  of  the  Constitution,  already  referred 
to,  declares  that  "all  bills  for  raising  revenue  shall  originate  in  the 
House  of  Representatives.''  This  is  a  privilege  of  the  people  older 
than  Hampden,  and  a  privilege  made  prominent  in  our  Constitution, 
but  reciprocity  treaties  would  abridge  and  curtail  this  fundamental 
privilege  of  the  Representatives  of  the  people.  In  all  of  our  history 
duties  on  imports  have  been  our  chief  source  of  revenue— except  in 
extraordinary  exigencies  our  sole  reliance ;  and  if  tariffs  by  a  treaty 
can  be  established,  modified,  or  repealed,  or  fixed  and  made  un- 
changeable for  a  generation,  they  can  be  so  fixed  forever,  and  the 
power  of  the  House  to  originate  revenue  bills  would  be  practically 
reduced  to  a  mere  shadow.  If  dutiable  articles  can  bo  made  free,  the 
same  power  can  make/ree  articles  dutiable.  One  of  the  dearest  prin- 
ciples of  republican  government,  cherished  as  a  bulwark  of  liberty, 
should  not  thus  be  fatally  undermined.  The  power  belongs  not  to 
one  House  only,  but  to  every  House  of  Representatives  in  perpetuity — 
to  the  present  and  also  to  the  future ;  and  the  treaty-making  power 
should  not  attempt  to  take  it  away  by  usurpation  nor  by  absorption. 
Though  the  present  House  should  give  its  consent  to  such  a  treaty,  it 
could  not  even  bind  itself,  and  far  less  any  succeeding  Honse.  The 
power  lives  in  the  Constitution,  for  above  the  reach  of  any  suicidal 
assault,  and  can  neither  be  abdicated  by  the  House  nor  subverted  by 
any  other  branch  of  the  Gk>vomment,  but  must  remain  forever  as 
potential  ofl  any  other  vital  part  of  the  Constitution. 

True,  the  reciprocity  treaty  of  1854,  pitilessly  terminated  as  it  was 
by  congressional  direction  at  the  earliest  practicable  day,  is  still  pre- 
served, in  spite  of  its  repulsive  memories,  as  a  precedent ;  but  a  bad 
precedent,  solitary  and  alone,  does  not  expunge  a  single  line  of  the 
Constitution,  and  the  precedent  stands  only  as  a  scarecrow  in  the 
field  to  prevent,  one  of  the  gravest  blunders  in  our  diplomacy  from 
being  repeated.  An  unlawful  act  cannot  be  legalized  by  an  old  pre- 
cedent nor  by  a  new  repetition.  There  are  much  better  precedents 
against  such  treaties,  and  notably  that  made  by  the  Senate  from  its 
own  enlightened  self-prompted  action  in  1844  and  1845,  against  the 
ZoU-Verem  treaty  negotiated  by  Mr.  Wheaton,  which,  upon  the  report 
made  by  Mr.  Choate,  of  Massachusetts,  whose  high  authority  no  one 
in  this  body  will  bo  likely  to  dispute,  and  reiterated  by  Mr.  Archer, 
of  Virginia,  (who  after  fifteen  years  of  distinguished  service  in  the 
House  was  made  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations 
of  the  Senate  upon  his  first  entrance  here,)  was  rejected  by  a  very- 
large  majority  of  the  Senate,  and  not  by  a  party  vote,  but  for  such 
cogent  reasons  as  the  following,  and  I  quote  from  this  report : 

That  the  committee,  then,  are  not  prepaied  to  sanction  ho  largo  an  innovntion  on 
the  ancient  and  nniform  practice  in  respect  of  the  department  of  Government  uy 
which  duties  on  imports  sliaU  be  imposed;  that  the  Cfonstitution  in  express  terms 
delegates  the  power  to  Congress  to  regiliate  commerce  and  impose  duties,  and  to 
no  ouers ;  and  that  the  control  of  trade  and  the  fonotiong  of  tiudng  belong  without 
abridgment  or  participation  to  Congress. 

If  these  were  sound  doctrines  of  the  ablest  of  American  statesmen 
thirty  years  ago  in  a  fertile  era  of  illustrious  men,  they  have  not  be- 
come obsolete,  out  are  equally  sound  and  worthy  of  all  acceptation 
to-day.  There  has  been  no  change  in  any  portion  of  the  Coustitn- 
tion  affecting  this  question,  and  any  change  of  the  oldest  and  best 


11 


me  law  of 
arles  I,  be- 
er of  Ckm- 
de  by  any 

J  referred 
Date  in  the 
sople  older 
nstitution, 
ndamentnl 
sur  history 
-except  in 
by  n  treaty 
made  nn- 
sr,  and  the 
practically 
fe  free,  the 
sarest  prin- 
of  liberty, 
igs  not  to 
irpetnity — 
ing  power  . 
:tb8<)rption. 
a  treaty, it 
DHse.    The 
ly  suicidal 
bverted  by 
forever  as 

d  as  it  was 
is  still  nre- 

but  a  bad 
line  of  the 
row  in  the 
niacy  from 
an  old  pre- 
precedents 
be  from  its 
igainst  the 

the  report 
ity  no  one 
Ir.  Archer, 
^ice  in  the 

Kelations 

by  a  very 
it  for  such 
rt: 

inoTKtion  on 
emmcnt  uy 
press  terms 
ities,  and  to 
Qng  without 

statesmen 
ve  not  be- 
soeptation 
Conatitn- 
aud  best 


interpretation  of  the  Constitution  cannot,  as  it  seems  to  me,  be  logi- 
cally attempted,  or  if  attempted,  cannot  fail  to  be  fraught  with  mis- 
chief to  the  spirit  as  well  as  to  the  machinery  of  our  form  of  govern- 
ment. 

The  paramount  object  aimed  at  in  the  Zoll-Verien  treaty  was  to 
obtain  the  admission  into  Germany  of  American  tobacco  at  a  duty 
of  not  over  two  and  a  half  cents  per  pound ;  and  it  is  a  significant 
commentary  upon  so-called  reciprocity  treaties  that  the  laboriously 
obtained  stipulations  of  Mr.  Wheaton,  at  the  price  of  numberless 
concessions  to  be  made  by  us,  wt-j'e  secured  through  our  minister,  Mr. 
Mann,  in  less  than  two  years,  or  in  1846,  without  any  equivalent 
whatever  on  the  part  of  the  United  States.  If  reciprocity  with  a 
nation  of  Europe  was  wholly  inadmissable,  it  must  be  equally  inad- 
missable  with  tue  Canadaa. 

There  is  a  further  inextricable  com|>lication  involved  in  a  treaty  of 
reciprocity.  "  The  most  favored  nation  clause,"  so  called,  has  been 
inserted  in  nearly  all  of  our  treaties,  aud  this  clause  is  siugolarly 
enough  repeated  in  article  4  of  the  present  proposals,  as  follows : 

For  the  term  mentioned  in  article  13  no  other  or  higher  dnty  shall  be  imposed 
In  the  United  States  upon  other  articles  not  enamerated  in  said  schedules  the 
KTOTrth,  pfodnoe,  or  mannfectnre  of  Canada,  or  in  Canada  upon  such  other  articles 
the  growth,  produce,  or  manufacture  of  the  IJnited  States,  than  are  respoctively  im- 
post upon  Uke  articles  the  growth,  produce,  or  manufacture  of  Great  Britain  or 
of  any  other  country. 

This  certainly  wonld  interdict  any  more  reciprocity  treaties ;  but 
the  same  provision,  in  &  form  to  include  everything,  exists  in  our  trea- 
ties with  other  nations,  and  forbida  the  grant  of  any  favors  to  one 
that  are  not  at  once  freely  granted  to  every  other  nation.  It  is  not 
merely  what  the  soundest  American  policy  requires  us  to  do,  bnt  our 
honor  is  pledged  not  to  treat  one  nation  m  time  of  peace  with  more 
favor  than  any  other.  This  provision  having  long  existed  in  onr  trea- 
ties with  Oreat  Britain,  Lora  Aberdeen,  at  the  nrst  rumor  of  Whea- 
ton's  negotiation  of  the  ZoU-Verein  treaty  in  1844,  notified  our  min- 
ister in  London,  Mr.  Everett,  that  Great  Britain  would  claim  an  equal 
relaxation  of  duties  in  their  favor,  aud  Mr.  Everett  admitted  the  pro- 
priety of  the  claim,  provided  it  was  accompanied  by  the  same  equiv- 
alents. To  this  Lord  Aberdeen  responded  that  he  conceived  that,  by 
the  convention  of  July  3, 1815,  we  should  be  bound  to  admit  Britisn 
fabrics,  on  paying  the  same  duties  as  the  German,  without  any  such 
conditions  on  their  part. 

An  examination  will  show  that  Lord  Aberdeen  was  not  wrong  in 
his  construction  of  the  terms  referred  to,  which  are  nothing  less  than 
a  positive  negation  of  the  right  to  impose  higher  or  other  duties  upon 
British  fabrics  than  upon  any  other,  without  any  reservations  as  to 
conditions  or  equivalents.  We  have  pledged  the  good  faith  of  the 
nation  in  numerous  treaties  with  foreign  nations  not  to  grant  any 
exclusive  favors  of  this  character.  Great  Britain,  having  herself 
objected  to  such  a  German  treaty,  should  be  the  last  to  propose  one. 
and  is  it  likely  that  Bismarck  wonld  be  less  exacting  than  Lord 
Aberdeen,  or  that  other  nations  wonld  quietly  slumber  over  what  they 
might  fairly  regard  as  an  infraonou  of  treaty  stipulations  T  Surely 
onr  State  and  Treasuiy  Departments,  if  the  proposed  treaty  should  be 
coosnmmated,  would  have  a  lively  time  in  shielding  themselves  from 
the  reclamations  of  Russia  for  all  duties  paid  on  iron  and  hemp,  and 
of  Buenos  Ayres  for  any  duties  paid  on  wool,  as  well  as  similar  recla- 
mations of  mtoy  other  governments. 

In  the  interpretation  of  the  Constitution  and  of  treaties  I  regret 


IfT 


12 


that  I  bring  no  technical  skiU,  and  have  only  that  confidence  in  my 
argnment  which  is  derived  from  an  honest  pnrpoHe  to  give  to  our 
language  its  plain  and  obvious  meaning  and  which  appears  to  me 
moat  in  harmony  with  free  institutions. 

But  there  are  other  considerations  involved,  such  as  the  fisheries, 
canals,  and  reciprocal  free-trade,  which  merely  raise  the  questions  of 
fsqnivalents  or  of  trade ;  and  when  it  comes  to  these,  any  one  of  us 
may  be  presumed  to  be  enough  of  a  Yankee  to  know  whether  he  is 
offered  a  good  or  bad  bargain. 

THE  4nBH«BIB8. 

There  is  an  ancient  and  fish-like  smell  about  the  new  propositions 
which  play  an  important  part,  and  if  accepted  they  are  to  -iiipersede 
those  agreed  upon  in  1871,  wUch  are  to  run  ten  years  and  then  only 
to  terminate  after  two  years'  notice.  The  question  oL  tlie  fisheries 
has  long  been  a  useful  factor  to  Qreat  Britain  in  many  of  their  nego- 
tiations with  us.  By  the  17^  treaty  of  peace  we  were  to  have  all  the 
fishing  privileges  wo  had  enjoyed  as  colonies.  In  the  treaty  of  peace 
in  1815  nothins  was  said  to  change  the  old  compact;  but  as  an  after 
thought,  in  1818  it  was  claimed  that  the  treaty  of  1783  was  extin- 
guished by  the  war  of  1812,  and  we  then  appeared  to  have  yielded 
car  right  to  the  fisheries  within  three  miles  of  the  provincial  shores. 
This  line  has  been  the  fruitful  cause  of  irritation  as  well  as  of  many 
petty  collisions,  sometimes  threatening  collisions  of  greater  magni- 
tude, and  has  been  the  spouting  fountain  of  annoyances  aud  prepos- 
terous pretensions. 

By  the  treaty  of  1871  we  not  onljr  save  a  consideration  of  much 
greater  value  for  the  right  to  fish  within  this  magical  lino,  but  we 
agreed  to  pay  any  additional  difterence  in  money  which  a  board  of 
fish  commissioners  should  decide,  as  referees,  to  be  equitable.  It 
was  not  enouffh  that  we  save  them  our  inshore  fishing-grounds  for 
theirs,  although  the  quantity  of  fish  caught  on  our  shores  might  be 
equal  and  the  value  double;  it  was  not  enough  that  they  might 
catch  their  mackerel  with  our  bait— not  elsewhere  to  be  had ;  it  was 
not  enough  that  we  opened  our  markets  free  to  their  fish  and  tlius 
surrendered  duties  upon  $2,503,934,  (upon  which  they  paid  duties  in 
1871.)  amounting  to  a  haU  million  dollars ;  but  we  are  to  be  fright- 
ened out  of  our  wits  and  concede  reciprocity  lest  the  fish  commis- 
sioners should  make  an  extravagant  award  agaiust  us.  The  case  has 
been  from  time  to  time  adroitly  mani^i^  and  greatly  magnified. 
The  menace  of  the  naval  squadron  was  tried  prior  to  the  treaty  of 
1854— the  armed  police  of  the  seas  was  tried  in  1866- and  now  softer 
diplomacy  is  resorted  to  as  more  politic ;  but  we  should  not  forget  that 
whenever  appealed  to  in  all  the  issues  of  the  post,  the  God  of  bat- 
tles and  the  goddess  of  justice  have  most  often  shown  favor  to  the 
American  contestants.  The  value  of  our  fish  markets  alone,  includ- 
ing the  markets  for  fresh  fish,  being  worth  five  times  more  than  all 
the  profit  we  receive  in  return,  the  foot  cannot  be  concealed  from 
the  referees,  and  I  would  not  damage  our  side  of  the  case  by  an  tin- 
warranted  doubt  as  to  its  merits  or  as  to  the  tribunal. 

The  admission  of  American  fishiiw  vessels  to  all  the  pri\nleges  ac- 
corded to  British  vessels  was  beneMud  to  the  people  of  the  Provinces, 
who  largely  profited  by  furnishing  supplies,  ana  was  not  injurious 
to  their  fisheries,  which  steadUy  increased  in  value.  When  the  former 
treaty  was  terminated,  the  Canadian  government  resorted  to  a  system 
of  licenses  charging  fifty  cents  per  ton  upon  our  vessels  engaged  in 
the  inshore  fisheries.  The  small  value  of  the  privilege  was  soon  dis- 
cloMd  when  only  354  of  our  1,400  fishing  vessels  were  found  to  take 


ont  a  license  on  these  terms.  The  next  year  the  license  was  raised 
to  one  dollar  per  ton,  and  the  number  licensed  fell  off  to  281.  The 
license  was  again  doubled,  when  at  two  dollars  in  1868  only  56  were 
taken  ont,  and  but  ii5  in  1869.  No  more  than  one-fourth  of  onr  ves- 
sels wanted  the  privilege  at  any  price,  and  at  two  dollars  per  ton  it 
was  hardly  accepted  by  any.  This  sliows  that  the  actual  valae  of 
the  inshore  fisheries,  when  estimated  by  onr  fishenuen  in  dollars  and . 
cents,  was  the  merest  trifle,  and  its  great  importance  appears  to  be 
almost  wholly  in  its  being  ever  present  as  the  old  sore  of  former 
treaties  for  which  some  new  plaster  is  always  demanded. 
As  a  nursery  for  bold  and  hardy  beamen  the  fisheries  were  long  ap- 

Sreciated  by  us,  and  they  have  lost  nothing  yet  in  the  estimation  of 
iritish  or  French  statesmen.  At  the  time  we  repealed  our  bounty 
system  the  French  were  paying  and  still  pay  lonr  dollars  per  ton 
bounty  for  all  the  tonnage  engaged  in  their  fisheries,  and  the  Cana- 
das  at  once  put  on  the  armor  we  threw  off  by  offeriu^  a  bounty  to  all 
the  provincial  tonnage  so  employed.  They  are  ambitious  to  increase 
their  commercial  marine  and  they  oonld  do  much  in  that  direction — 
so  cheap  is  their  labor  and  ship-timber— if  we  should  only  consent  to 
furnish  employment  orpurcnasers  for  their  shipping  when  built. 
According  to  the  Canadian  Mercantile  Annual,  as  a  maritime 
nation  Canada  already  holds  the  fourth  rank  among  the  nations  of 
the  world,  having  a  tonnage  almost  equal  to  France,  and  onlv  rank- 
ing decidedly  below  Great  Britain  and  the  United  States.  They  are 
not  only  ready  to  invade  onr  canals,  rivers,  and  lakes,  but  they  would 
extend  and  clinch  the  compact  for  a  reciprocity  in  the  fisheries  for 
the  longest  possible  term,  as  that  will  diminish  the  number  of  our 
vessels  employed  and  increase  those  of  Canada.  Under  the  former 
reciprocity  treaty  their  exports  to  the  United  States  of  fish  very 
largely  increased,  or  nearly  doubled,  while  our  tonnage  engaged  in 
the  cod-fisheries  in  1854,  amounting  to  102,194  tons,  dwindled  at  the 
close  of  1866  down  to  43,796  tons,  or  a  loss  of  over  one-half,  uncom- 
pensated for  by  any  considerable  improvement  in  the  distant  mack- 
erel fisheries.  From  this  low  state,  in  consequence  of  harassing  and 
perpetual  annoyances,  equal  in  olden  time  to  provocations  of  actual 
war,  our  fishermen  havie  not  even  yet  been  able  to  recover.  I  am  very 
clearly  of  the  opinion  that  strict  equity  would  require  the  payment 
tu  us  of  a  large  Dalance  by  the  Dominion  government  on  the  question 
of  the  fisheries ;  and  so  long  as  they  have  our  markets  free,  so  long 
will  the  vocation  of  our  fishermen  be  imperiled  and  their  munbers 
year  by  year  be  diminished. 

CAXAIS. 

It  might  be  expected  that  some  one  of  the  inducements  offered  by 
the  Dominion  government  in  their  proposals  for  a  i^iprocity  treaty 
would  at  least  include  privileges  of  equal  value  with  those  they  de- 
mand in  retnro,  but  it  will  foe  difficult  to  find  any  of  this  character; 
and  among  the  enormously  one-sfded  stipulations  which  challenges 
notice  is  that  of  the  navifpttion  of  lakes,  rivers,  and  canals.  They 
<^er  to  us  the  navigation  of  the  Saint  Lawrence  Biver,  the  Welland 
and  other  Saint  Lawrence  oanaIs.^d  also  to  build  the  Canghnawaga 
Canal,  twenty-nine  and  a  half  milBi  long,  in  the  course  of  six  years; 
all  of  which  we  are  to  have  the  use  of— for  that  portion  of  the  year 
of  course  when  they  are  not  ice-bound— by  paying  such  tolls  as  they 
choose  to  impose. 

But  in  return,  and  always  as  a  mere  equivalent,  they  demand  the 
unrestricted  use  of  Lake  Champlain  ana  of  the  much  larger  Lake 
Michigan,  together  with  the  right  to  navigate  the  Bed  Biver.    That 


u 


8uch  privileges  on  the  lakes,  especially  on  Lake  Michigan,  wonld 
prove  unfortunate  conoessions  an«l  detrimental  to  our  shipping  inter- 
ests is  quite  apparent.  Beyond  all  this  they  expect  the  States  of 
Michigan  and  New  York  to  accord  to  them,  in  like  manner,  the  use 
of  the  Sault  Saint  Marie,  Saint  Clair  Flats.  Whitehall,  and  the  Erie 
Canals,  over  five  hundred  miles  in  length,  in  exchange  for  less  than 
one  hundred  miles. 

Again,  unless  the  Whitehall  Canal  shall  be  enlarged  and  deep- 
ened, and  its  use  granted  to  the  lower  waters  of  the  Hudson — a  most 
important  concession  of  itself — Canada  reserves  the  riffht  to  sus- 
pend the  use  of  the  Canghuawaga  Canal.  Whether  the  State  of 
New  York  would  assome  this  burden,  and  build  up  a  formidable 
rival  to  their  own  canals  and  railroads,  at  an  expense  ]M>88ibly  of 
more  than  the  whole  cost  of  all  the  Canadian  canals,  is  at  least 
problematical.  To  us  the  Canghnawaga  Canal  would  be  convenient, 
but  to  the  Canadas  it  is  almost  indispensable  as  a  means  of  getting 
their  timber  and  agrioaltural  products  to  our  markets.  The  trans- 
parent cheapness  of  the  offer  appears  when  it  is  remembered  that  the 
oonstruction  of  the  Caushnawaga  was  a  settled  question  of  their 
domestic  policy  at  the  time  of  the  union  of  the  provinces.  Their 
canals  are  now  kept  in  repair  mainly  by  tolls  received  from  us.  The 
transportation  of  American  property  through  the  Wolland  Canal  in 
1869  was  nearly  three  times  greater  than  of  Canadian  property,  as 
follows: 

Ton*. 

From  American  to  American  porta 668,700 

From  American  to  Cunadian  porta 315,837 

V  904,557 

From  Canadian  to  Canadian  porta 195,407 

From  Canadian  to  American  ports 134,935 

390,359 
It  would  be  wonderfnl  indeed  were  they  to  reject  the  income  thus 
derived  from  us  upon  their  canals,  and  it  is  probable  they  will  be 
open  forever  to  all  who  will  pay  as  they  go.  "  The  law  is  open  to 
everyone;"  "so,"  said  Home  Tooke,  "is  the  London  tavern."  In 
the  absence  of  any  treaty,  why  should  the  Canadas  exclude  from  their 
canals  the  through  business  from  American  to  American  ports,  touch- 
ing no  interests  which  it  does  not  promote,  and  the  business  from 
whence  has  come  and  always  mnst  come  the  balk  of  the  tolls  rt;qnired 
for  their  sapport  T  The  London  tavern  is  not  supported  in  that  way'. 
It  is  possible  at  the  end  of  six  years  that  the  Dominion  may  iind  it 
inconvenient  or  impracticable  to  deepen  the  Saint  Lawrence  Canals 
or  to  build  the  Canghnawaga,  or  that  they  may  require  twice  six 
years  for  their  comptetion.  The  treaty  meanwhile  is  operative ;  and 
Will  they  not  all  the  time  have  eivjoyed  its  f  mits  1  True,  we  may 
then  exclude  tUcm  from  the  Erie  and  Whitehall  Canals  and  the  Hud-, 
son  Biver,  bat  would  not  that  be  a  lame  conclusion  T  They  now  levy 
an  export  duty  on  logs,  and  there  in  nothing  in  the  new  proposals 
which  prevents  its  continuance  or  even  an  increase  on  logs  or  any 
otiier  articles.  Export  duties  ma^  be  resorted  to  by  the  Canadas  at 
any  time,  but  to  us  they  are  forbidden.  They  run  no  risk  of  export 
duties,  but  we  do.    Are  we  not  likely  to  be  checkmated  T 

It  is  not,  however,  discreditable  to  us  as  a  nation  of  forty-two  mil- 
lions of  people,  with  railroads  nearly  eqaal  in  extent  to  those  of  all 
the  rest  of  the  world,  that  we  shonld  look  to  dependencies  of  Great 
Britaia  for  such  improvementa  in  the  artificial  cotirses  of  water  trans- 


an,  would 
ping  inter- 
Sttttes  of 
er,  the  use 
il  the  Erie 
leas  than 

and  deop- 
ni— a  most 
ht  to  sua- 
State  of 
'oruiidable 
wsBlbly  of 
»  at  least 
>nveniont, 
>f  getting 
The  trons- 
Bd  that  the 
n  of  their 
les.    Their 
a  ns.    The 
1  Canal  in 
•operty,  as 

Totu. 
6ee,70o 

915, 8S7 

9M.S57 

195, 407 
134,935 

330,353 

come  thus 
ey  will  be 
is  open  to 
vern."    In 
from  their 
rts,  touch- 
iness from 
8  required 
that  wayl 
lay  find  it 
ce  Canals 
twice  six 
fcive;  and 
,  we  may 
the  Hud- 
now  levy 
proposals 
jsor  any 
tnadas  at 
of  ejiport 

-twomil- 
>se  of  all 
of  Oreut 
:er  trans- 


15 

portatioDS  as  the  obvious  necessities  of  our  country  i-equire  t  Our 
safest  policy  is  to  build,  not  to  boiTow,  nor  to  pay  rentals  or  tolls  to 
foi-eigners,  subject  to  be  turned  adrift  at  anv  moment.  The  revenue 
that  wo  must  surrender  in  a  single  year  by  the  ndmlHsion  of  Canadian 
products  OS  proposed  free  of  duties,  or  the  profits  wc  sliould  transfer 
from  our  own  people  to  the  pockets  of  our  neighbors,  would  enlarge 
or  build  adequate  canals,  and  make  ns,  as  to  inland  water  communi- 
oations,  independent  forever.  Able  as  we  are  to  stand  alone,  let  us 
decline  to  loan  upon  weaker  neighbors,  who  lean  themselves  upon 
somebody  else.  We  willingly  allow  them  to  use  our  railroads  and 
cars  for  the  transit  of  their  foreign  exports  and  imports  to  and  from 
Jfevr  York,  Boston,  Portland,  and  other  places,  and  the  business  is  not 
unprofitable  to  our  thoroughfares.  We  might  refuse  this,  but  have 
no  such  intention  unless  the  suspicion  proves  true  that  it  is  the  great 
thoroughfare  of  ilUoit  trade.  We  envy  the  prosperity  of  no  other 
country,  and  are  content  with  our  own. 

LOSS  OF  UKVSNVB. 

If  we  waive  the  all-controlling  constitutional,  as  well  as  other 
manifoldobjections,  tothis  embryotic  reciprocity  treaty,  it  is  of  some- 
conseqnence  to  consider  whether  or  not  we  have  a  surplus  revenue  of 
twenty  million  dollars  which  we  can  annually  forego  for  the  next 
twenty-four  years,  or  whether  we  can  attbrd  to  supply  its  place  by  an 
increase  of  other  taxes,  dintct  or  indirect,  or  by  a  re-enactment  of  the 
income  tax,  or  by  a  renewal  of  the  duties  on  tea  and  coffee.  It  is 
unlikely  that  we  hanker  after  either  alternative,  and  either  would  be 
a  melancholy  equivalent  for  what  seems  to  be  a  reciprocity  with  the 
tracks  all  pointuiK  one  way.  Instead  of  a  surplus  to  be  carelessly 
extinguished,  we  nave  in  1H74  a  deficiency  in  the  sinking  fund  of 
926,8^,217.16,  not  to  be  provided  for  except  by  a  further  sweeping 
reduction  of  national  expenditures.  It  is  altogether  improbable  that 
Congress  or  the  people  will  forget  what  is  due  to  a  solemn  pledge  of 
the  public  faith  which  requires  the  absolute  annual  payment  of  1 
per  cent,  of  the  public  debt. 

Of  oonrse  the  amount  of  imports  from  the  Canadas  at  present 
being  largely  subject  to  duties,  affords  no  basis  for  an  estimate  of  the 
amount  which  would  come  in  if  wholly  free,  and  the  statement 
scattered  last  year  broadcast  over  the  country  by  the  British  negotia- 
tors of  the  trade  between  the  respective  countries  was  based  upon  very 
nnreliable  public  documents.  By  our  account  the  exports  of  lard  in 
1873  were  4,057,280  pounds,  but  by  the  Canadian  count  only  1,357,230 
pounds  had  been  received.  By  our  account  our  exports  of  tea  were 
454,579  pounds,  but  by  the  Canadian  account  they  had  received 
5,163,499  pounds.  Thevalue  of  anpiments  based nponsnch  data  is  not 
g^at.  If  the  proposed  treaty  could  be  regarded  in  any  of  its  various 
aspects  as  benefioial  to  our  whole  country,  it  is  too  spparentthat  now* 
we  are  not  in  any  condition  to  abandon  annually  the  millions  of  rev- 
enue which  would  be  lost  by  its  adoption ;  but  I  shall  attempt  to 
show  that  it  deserves  to  be  rejected,  not  only  for  the  reason  that  it 
cannot  be  beneficial,  but  because'  it  would  be  an  insufferably  bad  bar- 
gain  as  a  whole  or  in  any  of  its  complicated  parts. 

The  Canadian  Dominion,  under  ttjair  reciprocity  proposals,  will  be: 
called  upon  to  surrender  very  little  revenue,  or,  according  to  their 
own  estimate,  not  more  than  $4,000,000.  Is  it  possible  that  this  can 
be  considered  an  equal  bargain  for  the  surrender  on  our  part,  when 
the  treaty  gets  into  full  working  order,  of  twenty  millions  f  Curi- 
ously enough  most  of  the  articles  in  schedule  A  of  the  new  proposi-^ 
tiou,  embiaoing  the  great  bulk  of  agricultural  productions,  are  now 


16 


free  nnder  the  Canadian  tariff.  Bnt  if  they  weie  not  free  the  Can- 
adas  would  loae  no  more  revenue  by  making  them  free  than  the 
maritime  provincoH  lose  by  making  flan  free,  aa  they  do  not  bny  these 

groductions,  but  always  nave  a  surplas  to  sell.  The  Canadas  might 
are  some  diflSculty  even  in  makins  up  their  small  loss  of  revenue, 
but  our  deficiency  can  only  be  supplied  in  the  inconvenient  way  al- 
ready  indicated,  or  by  the  severe  imposition  of  heavier  taxation. 
Canada  may  well  alFord  to  give  up  four  millions  of  revenue  on  im- 
ports if  her  people  are  to  gain  many  times  that  amount  in  the  in- 
creased price  of  their  exports.  For  What  they  gain  they  could  afford 
to  bear  additional  taxiition,  but  ira  could  not,  as  our  Govenuaent 
would  not  only  lose  much  revenue,  bnt  our  people  would  suffer  still 
greater  losses. 

The  proposed  reciproci^  treaty  offers  nothing  new  or  no  attractions 
to  our  Southern  States.  The  staple  products  of  the  South  which  are 
to  be  admitted  into  the  Canadian  dominion  free  of  duty,  if  the  treaty 
should  be  ratified,  are  already  free  under  their  present  tariff  laws, 
and  will  from  their  natnre  so  remain.  The  products  referred  to  are 
hemp,  cotton,  tobacco  unmanufactured,  rosin,  tar,  turpentine. 

The  direct  interests  of  the  Southern  States  therefore  will  remain 
practically  in  the  same  relative  condition,  treaty  or  no  treaty,  and 
these  products  have  been  nominally  included  in  the  proposition  as  so 
much  paddine  costing  nothing.  This  cheap  stuflBng  obtained  from 
the  existing  free  list  of  the  dominion,  and  used  with  the  profuseness 
of  French  milliners,  forms  no  inconsiderable  portion  of  the  offer  ten- 
dered to  us,  and  might  be  very  well  oflEset  by  a  kindred  tender  of  a 
selection  from  our  own  existing  free  list  with  equal  generosity  and 
Just  as  little  sacrifice. 

The  manufactures  enumerated,  however,  are  chiefly  of  the  same 
class  with  those  Rpringiuff  up  all  through  the  Southern  States  and 
would  seriously  interfere  there  with  new  and  profitable  branches  of 
industry  of  the  highest  merit  which  ought  not  to  encounter  any  such 
discouragements.  Moreover,  the  Southern  States  have  more  interest 
in  the  general  prosperity  ai  the  oouutry  than  any  other  section.  When 
the  nation  moves  onward  with  health  and  vigor,  it  never  fails  to  em- 
brace all  its  members  in  it<8  arms.  But  the  proposed  treaty  is  not 
only  remarkable  for  what  it  includes  but  for  what  it  excludes.  It 
may  not  be  difficult  to  discover  why  some  articles  were  left  out.  Un- 
doubtedly some  Canadian  products  require  protection,  and  these  are 
of  course  shielded  from  reciprocity. 

The  proposed  treaty  contains  all  the  articles  inoludi^  in  the  treaty 
of  1864,  and  also  many  articles  of  manufactures.  They  are  described 
aa  "of  the  growth,  produce,  or  manufacture  of  the  respective  coun- 
tries," and  among  them  will  be  found  agricultural  implements,  boots 
and  shoes  of  leather,  cotton  grain-bags,  denims,  jeans,  drillings, 

51aids,  and  cottonades.  cabinet  furniture,  oarriaseM,  coal,  iron,  (bar, 
oopj  pig,  puddled,  rod,  aheet,  or  scrap,)  nails,  spikee,  leatner,  rags  of 
all  kind,  salt,  tweeds  of  wool,  manufaictures  of  wood. 
'  Aouc(n.TUBAL  coxparrnoii. 
Then  we  have  a  long  list  of  the  jproducts  of  the  farm,  among  which 
are  the  following:  Animals  of  All  kinds,  breadstnffs  of  all  kinds, 
Inoom-com,  butter,  cheese,  flour,  flax,  (unmanufactured,)  fruits, 
(green  or  dried, )  grain  of  all  kinds,  hay.  hemp,  hides,  horns,  lard,  lime, 
malt,  meats,  (fresh,  smoked,  or  salted,)  pelts,  pease,  plants,  petro- 
leum, poulti^,  rice,  shrubs,  seeds,  straw,  tidlow,  tobacco,  vegetables, 

WO(^ 

.  The  interesting  question  to  fanafira  is  what  they  would  have  to 


!:F 


te  theCnn- 
ee  thau  the 
ot  bay  these 
nadas  might 
of  reyenne, 
ient  way  al- 
er  taxation, 
enae  on  im- 
it  in  the  in- 
oould  afford 
GoTenuaent 
suffer  still 

>  attractions 
;h  which  are 
if  the  treaty 
i  tariff  laws, 
ferred  toare 
tine. 

will  remain 
I  treaty,  and 
osition  as  so 
tained  from 
profoseness 
ilio  offer  ten- 
.  tender  of  a 
aerosity  and 

of  the  same 
1  States  and 
branches  of 
ter  any  such 
lore  interest 
bion.  When 
r  fails  to  em- 
;reaty  is  not 
ixcludes.  It 
ft  out.  Un- 
id  these  are 

n  the  treaty 
ire  described 
ective  oonn- 
ments,  boots 
8,  drillings, 
1,  iron,  (bar, 
ther,  rags  ox 


none  which 
P  all  kinds, 
red,)  fmits, 
B,  lard,  lime, 
ants,  petro- 
▼egetobles, 

lid  have  to 


't7 

meet  and  how  much.  I  have  only  nntlieiitiu  data  us  to  tlio  prodiictH 
of  the  Canadian  dominion  as  late  lut  18tiO,  and  tboHO  I  den ve' from 
Mr.  Derby's  report,  made  in  18()7,  Of  course  in  ton  or  fifteen  years 
their  population  and  products  have  iucrcaacd.  I  give  the  following 
table : 


Fopnlation 

Honm 

Csttie 

Sheep 

Swine 

Com,  bnshels — 
Wheat,  btub.ela.. 

Oato,  baaheU 

Barley,  boshela.. 
Potatoea,  buahela 
Batter,  pounds... 


rotted  SUteR. 


Canada.' 


SI,  738, 831 

7,857,000 

88,731,31.% 

83,898,807 

35,fl60,a»l 

887,684,388 

170,176,087 

179,08»,095 

A  889, 898 

157,6!W,000 

430,678,038 


3,  ,101, 888 

783, 744 

3,375,937 

a,  317, 781 

1, 878,609 

8,684,100 

88,813,760 

43,634,806 

3,698,031 

39,306,330 

33,703,834 


Xova  Scotia. 


330,699 

38,789 

136,357 

888,180 

51,333 

3T,47S 

897,15? 

1,384,437 

196,097 

1,986,780 

3,613,880 


From  this  table  it  wiP  be  seen  that  the  Canadas,  representing  8  per 
cent,  of  the  po;  alation  of  the  United  States,  produce  more  than  their 
proportion  of  horses,  cattle,  and  sheep:  twice  its  proportion  of  wheat; 
three  times  its  proportion  of  oats  and  barley ;  an  average  of  batter, 
but  less  of  swine  and  com.  It  is  plain  that  agriculture  has  engaged 
the  m%|or  part  of  their  activities,  and,  if  they  cannot  be  saiuto  be 
our  rivals,  their  products  are  so  large  as  to  offer  considerable  and 
constantly  increasing  competition. 

When  the  former  treaty  of  1854  was  made,  our  whole  country  was 
comparatively  free  of  debt ;  we  were  doing  business  on  a  sonnd  cnr- 
renoy,  and  were  ready  for  any  race  with  equals ;  bnt  now,  although 
the  national  debt  is  so  a^Jnsted  as  to  be  carried  with  but  little  incon- 
venience, the  States,  counties,  cities,  and  towns  are  still  heavily  bur- 
dened by  indebtedness  incurred  daring  the  late  war  as  well  as  by  the 
oontinnance  of  the  war  made  paper  le^al-tender ;  and  therefore  for 
some  years  to  come  the  cost  of  production  will  be,  as  it  has  been,  so 
exceptionally  increased  as  to  place  ns  at  an  obvious  disadvantage 
with  neighbors  who  have  yet  had  no  snch  untoward  incidents  in  thei^ 
history.  We  cannot  at  present  afford  to  produce  horsei*,  cattle,  and 
sheep,  wheat,  peas,  oats,  butter,  and  potatoes  at  the  bottom  prices  of 
Canadian  markets;  nor  can  we  at  present  venture  to  accept  of  the 
nnrestricted  competition  to  which  wo  are  invited,  even  in  the  man- 
nfHOtnres  of  iron,  wood,  wool,  cotton,  and  leather,  with  neishbors 
where  all  the  labor  and  most  of  the  raw  materials  ai^  to  be  had  at 
far  less  cost  than  in  the  United  States,  and  with  neighbors,  too,  aa 
exempt  from  taxation  as  tiiey  are  from  many  of  the  costly  Improve- 
ments and  institutions  demand*^  by  the  people  of  a  large  republio 
and  by  an  enterprising  and  enlightened  age. 

Our  markets  are  sustained  by  forty-two  millions  of  people,  beyond 
all  question  the  largest  consumen(  »«r  capita  In  the  world,  and  the 
Canadian  markets  are  sustained  by  fess  than  foor  millions  of  people, 
loosely  stamng  across  a  broad  continent  in  an  elongated  and  disjointed 
belt  scarcely  more  than  fifty  miles  wide,  and  like  our  own  frontiers- 
men of  early  times  having  limited  wants  and  no  luxnrions  habits. 
Their  markets  are  few  and  relatively  inferior— offering  no  advan- 
tages to  ns,  while  our  markets  are  s*  many,  extensive,  and  accessible, 
that  they  may  be  always  reckoned  for  nearly  all  commodities  at  least 

2  0 


18 


ail 


^1  (icr  iTiit.  liutt'^r  tliiin  tlioHO  uitohh  tlio  IxinliM'.  Accortling  to  thn 
I'oiiurt  of  J.  N.  Lurneil  in  1871,  innde  in  ctinipliance  with  a  reHOlution 
of  CoDsrcBH,  tliu  (littt^ronco  is  nuich  grcutt^r.  From  nunientHS  detailH 
ua  to  the  privcH  of  proviuions,  gi-occrieH,  &c.,  ho  given  the  following 
resulta : 

Mmii  rai  in  of  pricon  iii  OutArio  to  pricvn  in  Now  York,  1  to  1.S8. 
Mean  riitio  of  privea  in  Now  Bninswivii  to  pricmi  in  Maine,  1  to  1,43. 
Mean  ratio  of  prlooa  in  the  city  of  Quebec  to  prices  in  Xew  Yorli,  1  to  1.43, 

The  ronio  authority  gives  the  results  as  to  wages  of  niochniiics  and 
farm-laborers,  as  follows : 

Mean  ratio  of  wages  in  Ontario  to  waftes  In  New  York,  I  to  l.tu. 
Mean  ratio  of  wosea  in  New  Brunswick  to  wntfea  in  Maine,  1  to  1.7^. 
Mean  ratio  of  wages  in  the  city  of  (juebeo  to  wages  in  New  York,  1  to  3.38. 

These  indisputable  facts  disclose  the  reason  why  onr  markets  aro 
so  eagerly  souglit  after.  Few  droves  or  car-loads  of  American  hoiiMW, 
cattle,  sheep,  nogs,  or  poultry  seoli  purchasers  at  Kingston,  Toronto, 
Montreal  or  Quebec,  or  at  an,v  other  of  their  military  posts ;  but 
though  subject  to  moderate  duties,  tliey  come^not  standing  upon  the 
order  of  their  coming — from  every  quarter  of  the  Canatlas,  by  land 
and  by  water,  to  the  United  States,  all  clamorous  for  higher  prices. 
The  diflferonce  in  wages  is  the  widest  diftereuce  of  all. 

The  magnitude  of  the  stake  they  are  striving  for  may  be  under- 
stood from  the  fact  that  the  year  after  the  termination  of  the  former 
reoiprocity  treaty  the  assessed  values  of  the  property  of  the  province 
of  Ontario  alone  fell  off  128,000,000.  That  (Icficicucy  they  want 
i-estored. 

The  territory  of  British  American  possessions,  encircling  almost 
one-fourth  of  the  globe,  and  extending  from  the  latitude  of  forty-five 
degrees  north  to  tne  open  polar  sea,  is  snperticially  greater  than  even 
that  of  the  United  States.  Much  of  it,  however,  must  remain  terra 
incognita,  or  only  frequent«d  by  the  hunter  and  trapper,  and  here  and 
there  by  that  bturdy  class  known  as  frontiersmen,  but  it  nevertheless 
offers  immense  facilities  for  expansion  in  grain-growing  and  stock- 
raising,  for  which  it  greatly  needs  an  outlet  less  remote  than  tho 
markets  ot  the  Old  World. 

Oeogrophical  barrierft  must  forever  compel  the  people  of  British 
Colnmbia,  Manitoba,  Saskatchewan,  New  Brunswick,  Nova  Scotia, 
Newfonnaland,  and  even  Labrador,  to  seek  and  to  prefer  commer- 
cial relations  with  the  United  States,  with  or  without  reciprooity, 
and  it  is  plain  that  an  unrestricted  access  to  our  markets  b,T  the  peo- 
ple of  thesis  provinces,  as  well  as  by  those  within  the  fertile  Canadian 
basin  drained  by  the  great  lakes,  would  rapidly  augment  their  agri- 
cultural productions  for  export,  stimulat«  their  labor,  and  immensely 
increase  the  value  of  their  landed  estates,  which,  with  all  their  per- 
sonal property  included,  is  now  less  than  the  aggregate  wealth  of 
Maflsaohnsetts.  They  would,  however,  all  grow  fat  ana  "  lard  the  lean 
earth  "  at  onr  expense.  Foir  this  result  the  equivalents  offered  to  us, 
instead  of  being  very  large  and  very  solid,  are  very  thin,  disputable, 
and  wholly  unsatisfactory. 

The  effect  of  all  this  upon  our  own  land  and  its  products  would  be 
reversed,  as  may  be  readily  foreseen,  and  would  be  equal  in  the  ag- 
gregate, but.  being  more  widely  distributed  than  their  gain,  the  per- 
centage of  mdlvianal  loss  would  be  less  than  their  iomvidnal  gain. 
The  price  of  beef  or  of  wheat  might  rise  in  Montreal  10, 15,  or  20 
per  cent.,  but  the  fall  would  be  somewhat  less  in  Chicago  or  Mil- 
waukee or  New  York.  The  surplus  products  of  the  Canadian  do- 
minion flung  npou  our  markets  by  shorter  and  cheaper  transportA 


nling  to  tho 
a  romlutioii 
eroiis  detnilH 
lie  following 


,4a. 

1  to  1.43. 

oohniiics  and 


I.7H. 

,  t  to  9.38. 

oiarketH  nro 
arican  hontuo, 
ton,  Toronto, 
r  poHt«;  but 
Ung  npon  tho 
uluH,  by  land 
ligher  prices. 

ay  be  under- 
of  the  former 

tho  province 
y  they  want 

-cling  almost 
>of  forty-flvo 
tcr  than  oven 
remain  terra 
and  here  and 
i  nevertheless 
g  and  stock- 
ote  than  tho 

le  of  British 
Nova  Scotia, 
)fer  commer- 
i  reciprocity, 
s  by  the  peo- 
ile  Canadian 
It  their  ogri- 
d  immensely 
all  their  per- 
to  wealth  of 
lard  the  lean 
)ffered  to  us, 
,  disputable, 

3tH  would  be 
al  in  the  ag- 
ain, the  per- 
vidnal  gain. 

10, 15,  or  20 
oogo  or  Mil- 
anadian  do- 

transporta 


19 

tioutliiin  from  tho  WcHtuiii  States  coiiUl  not  fail  to  Hi-imibly  diniinJHli 
tlie  values  antl  nrodacts  of  agricultural  industries  throughout  the 
IJnited  States.  When  no  more  than  ten  thousand  beeves  are  wanted, 
thrust  an  additional  tliousand  uimui  tho  market  and  the  whole  will 
sell  for  no  more  than  would  tho  ton  thousand,  leaving  but  nine  jtarts 
of  the  sum  received  to  the  owners  of  the  ten  thousand.  Of  course 
it  could  not  bo  supposed  that  any  intlux  here  of  Canadian  nro- 
dnots  would  bring  down  prices  sijuarely  to  the  present  Canaaiun 
level,  because  equal  freedom  of  markets  would  tend  to  raise  prices 
there,  to  create  an  equilibrium,  and  that  is  what  Canadians  are  for : 
they  know  when  our  markets  are  united  with  theirs  and  all  are  open 
and  fi-ee,  that  prices,  like  liquids,  will  rise  to  the  same  height  in  the 
noziile  as  in  the  pot  itself ;  but  consumers  hero  would  be  only  bene- 
flted  by  just  the  amount  of  injury  inflicted  upon  our  agricultural 
]»ro<lncors.  Agriculturists  have  been  wont  to  encourage  manufac- 
tures because  that  policy  adds  to  the  number  of  consumers  of  their 
products  and  correspondingly  diminishes  competitors  among  them- 
selves. But  how  long  could  farmers  bo  oxepected  to  sustain  a  tarift' 
upon  manufactures  if  all  their  own  products  are  to  be  exceptionably 
ex])OBed  to  a  northern  blast  of  fi-ee  trade  f  After  «ueh  an  exposuro, 
any  harmonious  policy  as  to  a  tariff  oven  for  revenue  would  bo  in- 
deiinitely  foreclosed.  Protection  that  does  not  protect  farmers  will 
not  long  be  likely  to  protect  anybody, 

But  it  would  degrade  the  issue  to  suppose  that  onlj'  a  question  of 
taritTs  is  involved.  Immigrants  to  the  IJnited  States  number  annu- 
ally over  three  hundred  Fhoiisand,  but  the  Canados  receive  only  u 
much  smaller  number,  and  of  these  the  largest  share  barely  pass 
through  the  Canadas  and  eventually  tind  their  way  into  the  United 
States.  Beyond  this  there  is  a  constant  stroam  of  their  native  popn- 
«  lation  flowing  from  all  the  provinces  into  onr  territory.  Less  proflt 
in  wages  here  or  more  proflt  there  would  reverse  the  current.  It 
would  not  be  wise  for  us  to  favor  any  policy  that  would  diminish  the 
present  advantages  of  our  country  in  the  general  estimation  of  man- 
kind, or  that  would  turn  the  stream  of  immigrants  away  from  onr 
shores.  We  want  America  for  those  who  mean  to  be  Americans  and 
not  for  those  who  think  they  are  somebody  else. 

ORRAT  imrrAIN  BTA-NDS  IM  TIIR  WAT. 

Great  Britain  could  not  be  expected  to  make  such  a  treaty  without 
i-eceiving  from  her  colonies  the  same  privileges  granted  to  im.  What- 
ever is  made  free  of  duty  to  us  must  also  be  mMe  duty  free  to  Great 
Britain.  Ostensibly  the  Canadian  colonists  are  to  be  mused,  but  the 
nourishment  will  most  likely  add  solely  to  the  bulkof  paternal  English- 
men. A  wolf,  it  is  said,  suckled  Romulus  and  Remus,  but  there  is  no 
such  a  fable  concerning  the  British  lion.  We  got  no  exclusive  favors 
by  the  reciprocity  treaty  of  1854,  and  we  are  promised  none  now. 
Colonies  were  once  planted  to  get  gold  or  to  get  rid  of  convicts,  but 
they  are  now  only  maintained  to  secure  a  monopoly  of  trade.  Russia 
once  claimed  a  monopoly  of  all  the  trade  of  tne  Northern  Pacific ; 
Portugal  that  of  Asia,  and  England  now  expects  every  man  in  her 
colonies  to  du  his  duty  by  increasing  British  home  trade.  All  colonies 
are  perpetual  minors,  from  whom  it  is  regarded  as  no  robbery  for  impe- 
rial mothers  to  intercept  their  earnings,  if  only  a  frugal  subsistence 
remains.  The  British  restrictive  navigation  laws  as  to  colonies  were 
rigidly  enforced  down  to  1846,  and  it  will  be  found  that  this  proposed 
treaty  was  fore-ordained  to  enable  Canada  to  buy  more  of  Great 
Britain  and  to  sell  more  to  the  United  SUit«s,  or  to  buy  cheap  and  sell 
dear. 


90 


It',  thcrcfoi-f,  wii  ii(!co)it  of  Hiu'h  a  treaty,  it  miiitt  bu  lioriio  in  iniud 
thiit  \v«  hIiouIiI  filter  tlio  riico  for  tlit^  iiiarK»t8uf  Cuiiuilu uh  iimcli  with 
Oreut  llrltain  nn  witli  Canatln  linrH«!lf.  Tliis  part  ot'tho  urruiiKtMnent 
<1o«it  not  npiHsar  on  tlie  fae«  of  tlio  treaty,  tint  vropit  out  in  tliu  «l«clara- 
tion  iua4le  uy  th«  Hritiiili  ooniiuiiuiion«n«  to  our  Bocretary  of  8tat«<. 
Mr,  Brown  uiakoH  no  Ht-crot  of  ttio  fact  that  our  Hccrt^tary  was  at  once 
foruiallv  notititid  "that any  articloa made  free  in  (Junada  under  agree- 
luent  with  any  foreign  country  niUHt  he  iua«le  due  to  (jreat  Dritain." 

The  net  reHult  of  what  we  are  to  set  by  makinK  Cana«lian  products 
and  nianufai^tnreH  free  in  our  porlN Is  to  have  an  oitportnnity  to  com- 
pete  with  Great  Britain  ana  diitlodKe  her  foot-liohl,  if  we  can,  in 
Canadian  niarkctft.  Tlie  pnMluctM  of  aKriciilture  under  tlie  Canadian 
tariff  are  already  mainly  free  to  all  nations  and  will  ho  remain.  All 
such  nnMlucta  Canada  lian  to  sell,  and  really  buys  of  nolMHiy.  The 
tincfltion,  therefore,  an  to  our  ex|M>rtB  to  Canada  would  be  ]>ractically 
liudtod  to  mannfuctures.  Of  theso  our  iui|Mirt«i  front  Ureat  Britain, 
though  neccwarily  charged  with  heavy  duties,  are  larger  than  those 
Mbe  HtMids  to  any  other  country,  and  It  is  not  likely  that  she  much 
dreatis  to  meet  any  rival,  or  that  she  would  be  in  much  danger  of 
being  supplanted  by  ns  in  the  markets  of  her  own  colonies.  British 
Ntatcsmen,  s|M!aking  through  a  late  Hi>e«-(;h  of  the  Queen,  it  is  vcr}' 
cortaiu  fcul  no  npprohcusion  on  that  point. 

MANUrArTUUKM. 

C'anndn.Iins  only  recently  a4loptod  the  policy  of  ]>rotcctioii,  aad  her 
raannfactures,  though  growing  rapidly,  are  in  their  infancy.  It  is 
reasonable  to  suppose  tliat  some  of  the  articles  enumerated  in  the 
proposed  treaty  might  bo  profitably  exported  from  the  United  IStates 
to  too  dominion,  if  it  were  not  for  tha  back-door  to  bo  left  open  for 
the  entrance  of  the  same  articles  on  the  same  terms  from  Great 
Britain.  If  we  can  manufacture  cheaper  than  the  country  with 
which  they  claim  to  be  so  happily  connected,  then  the  treaty  might 
l>e  of  some  otlvantage  to  ns,  but  not  otherwise.  It  is  sutUciently 
apparent  that  with  a  removal  of  all  duties  we  could  not  now  com- 
])ete  with  Great  Britain  hero  at  home,  and,  if  not,  how  could  wo 
drive  her  out  of  the  Canada*  t  The  lower  priced  labor.  cheai>er  raw 
materials,  and  lighter  taxation  might  soon  even  force  tne  removal  of 
the  capital  and  industry  of  many  American  establishments  to  the 
other  side  of  Canada  line,  if  they  should  not  be  deterred  by  the 
f-heaper  capital  and  still  poorer  paid  labor  of  Groat  Britain  herself. 
The  chance  with  Canada  alone  would  not  be  very  inviting,  but  with 
Great  Britain  in  reserve  it  would  be  the  baldest  mockery.  The  manu- 
facturers of  Great  Britain  have  the  discipline  of  a  regnlar  army, 
while  those  of  America  are  but  militia,  superb  in  material  and  only 
delioient  in  the  driU  which  mnst  be  aoquirad  by  long  experience. 

But  while  the  Canadas  would  in  the  end  bo  ground  between  the 
upper  and  nether  millstone,  or  between  American  and  British  manu- 
factures, they  might  easily  increase  their  exports  in  manv  directions. 
Slate  they  send  to  ns  in  considerable  quantities,  though  we  require 
35  {ler  cent,  duty  to  be  paid.  Remove  this  duty,  as  proiMMed  by 
the  new  treaty,  and  few  of  our  slate  ouarries  could  be  worked  with- 
out a  heavy  reduction  of  the  price  of  labor.  The  admission  of  tim- 
ber and  lumber  wrought  and  unwrought  means  that  by  the  cheaper 
labor  of  Canada,  and  their  system  of  export  duties,  no  more  would 
come  in  unwrought;  and  how  broad  the  definition  would  be  aa  to 
what  might  be  included,  who  shall  tell  T  Granite,  marble,  and  build- 
ing-stone form  another  group  to  come  in  wrought  or  unwrought. 
Iti  building  the  practice  is  to  send  orders  to  quarries  for  dimeusiou 


HI 


no  111  mind 

iiiiicli  with 

'aiiUKinent 

lie  <l«clara- 

y  of  State. 

was  at  once 

iider  ogree- 

at  JJritain." 

til  productH 

ity  to  ooui- 

we  can,  In 

C'nnaclliin 

Buiaiu.    All 

biMly.    The 

practically 

!at  Britain, 

'  than  tlioMO 

t  Hlie  much 

danitnt  ot 

ea.    UritiHh 

,  it  in  vei^' 


on,  nad  hor 
iincy.     It  In 
ated  in  the 
iiitud  States 
>ft  open  for 
fn»m  Great 
•nntry  with 
roaty  might 
snfUciently 
t  now  com- 
nr  could  wo 
cheaper  raw 
removal  of 
9nt8  to  the 
red  by  the 
tin  herself. 
S,  bat  with 
The  maun- 
:nlar  army, 
U  and  only 
irienoe. 
Btween  the 
tish  manu- 
directions. 
we  require 
roiMMod  by 
irked  with- 
ion  of  tim- 
he  cheaper 
lore  would 
d  be  as  to 
and  build- 
nwrought. 
dimension 


block))  iiowu  anil  littuil,  ri'iidy  to  1>e  pliiciod  at  oiicm  into  any  Htrncturc. 
Iri  it  not  likely  that  all  the  dillontiit  i|uarri(vt  of  the  dominion  would 
at  once  be  net  ut  work  f  Reil  nundHtone,  grindHtoiioH,  marble,  and  even 
granite  could  not  here  ba  cut  and  wniught,  except  liy  convict  labor, 
HS  cheaply  as  it  is  now  done  by  common  Canadian  and  Nova  Scotia 
Htone-unttera.  Coarse  cotton  i{oo<Ih  and  tweeds  of  wikiI,  anil  iron  and 
steel,  aiitl  iMxits  and  shoes  wouUl  soon  found  a  new  Lowell,  a  new  Pitts- 
liiirgh,  and  a  new  Lynn  far  away  from  the  stars  and  strit>efl.  In  Can- 
ada what  wo  term  fancy  cossimeros  are  quite  as  often  known  and 
deserllMMl  as  tweeds.  The  phrase  "  t^voeils  of  wool"  iucludes  a  wide 
class  of  goods,  hitherto  yielding  little  protit  to  further  and  iinoertaiu 
<;ompetiuon.  Uuots  and  shoes  are  now  almost  wholly  inmle  by  inu- 
i'hinery  which,  marvellous  in  all  its  jmrts  as  it  is,  can  be  cheaply  trans- 
ferred to  Cuniwlu  and  soon  worked  even  by  unskilled  and  alien  hands. 
Machinery  knows  no  allegiance,  and  works  as  cheerfully  in  one  place 
lis  another.  Is  it  not  manifest  that  the  proposeil  treaty  shonld  not  re- 
ceive any  favor  f    Is  it  not  in  fa«t  a  liimk  baited  witli  a  red  rag  f 

There  will  be  a  lurking  ambiguity  in  the  practical  interpretation 
of  such  a  treaty,  and  our  experience  teaches  us  to  beware  oil  ambigu- 
ities in  any  treaties,  especially  with  Ureat  Britain  or  with  tlio  Can- 
ndus.  The  articles  proposed  in  the  schedules  to  be  admitted  free  are 
to  bo  the  growth,  produce,  or  inuniifacture  of  the  Dominion  of  Can- 
ada. Tho  question  will  arise,  to  what  anil  how  far  does  this  apply  1 
Kaw  materials,  if  siMit  to  us.  uiitst  Im  of  Caiimlian  growth  or  produce ; 
but  may  not  manufactures  be  wholly  or  in  part  of  foreign  materials  f 
If  so,  boots  and  shoes  iimy  bo  mode  of  foreign  leather,  and  yet  be 
called  nmnufactui'es  of  Canuila.  English  yarns  might  lie  woven  into 
cloth,  either  of  cotton  or  wool,  and  tiius  become  Canadian  manufac- 
tures. They  might  iirst  send  all  of  their  wool  here  to  market,  and 
then  send  whatever  they  choose  to  cull  tweeds,  wholly  mode  of  foreign 
low-priced  wools,  and  would  they  not  pass  for  Canadian  manufac- 
tures T  Would  ready-made  clothing  need  to  bo  mode  of  oiiy  other 
than  British  oloth  T  English,  Russia,  or  Swedes  iron  and  steel  could 
hudly  be  distinguished  from  Canadian  iron ;  and  if  it  could  be,  when 
made  into  rails,  nails,  spikes,  axes,  scythes,  plows,  hoes,  shovels,  or 
spades,  they  would  all  lie  called  Canadian  manufactures.  Screws 
made  of  English  wire,  and  nails  of  English  nail-plate,  would  claim 
i-eciprocity  privileges.  Marble,  in  blocks  or  slabs,  from  Italy  as  well  as 
from  CaDaua,  when  wrought  into  monnmenta,  mantels,  or  anything 
else,  could  not  be  denied  tne  claim  as  Canadian  manufactures.  Cast- 
ings made  of  Sootoh  pig-iron,  or  any  other,  in  the  form  of  stoves, 
range«L  hollow-ware,  or  machinery,  would  be  held  to  be  thoroughly 
Canadian.  Manafactures  advanced  a  single  stage,  receiving  the  last 
flnishing  touch,  might  thereby  obtain  the  guild  of  Canada.  Suppose 
any  of  these  articles  to  have  the  proper  Canadian  stamp  and  label 
upon  them,  how  would  any  fraud  be  detected  or  punished  f  The 
frauds  will  be  perpetrated,  if  perpetrated  at  all,  as  they  are  very 
likely  to  be,  by  Canadians.  Can  we  send  there  to  detect  or  puuiui 
themt 

Onr  revenne  laws,  sitting  too  lightly  upon  the  consciences  of  onr 
own  people,  have  never  bound  the  consciences  of  Canadians,  and  their 
reverence  would  not  be  much  intensified  by  a  reciprocity  treaty. 
Thin  partitions  would  divide  free  from  dutiable  merchandise.  Cus- 
tom-house oaths  are  elastic  the  world  over;  and  who  could  tell,  except 
the  men  who  swear,  whether  agricaltnral  tools,  grain-bags,  tweeds, 
and  locomotives  were  manufactured  wholly  or  in  part  in  the  Cana- 
dian dominion  or  cl»cwlicro  ?     The  Cauadinn   field  of  smugglers, 


» 


nlwayN  |>rolitl<-  an<l  uIioiiihUiik  in  itkilKul  nrllMU,  would  Ito  iniulo  to 
brtiiff  forth  a  liiiiiilrfol-folil  of  Itit  imiiM^iit  ill-t(ott<Mi  pn>fltii.  The 
(liitrtbotlng  iMiintN  of  illicit  trndu  in  thaCanmlM  would  no  lonaor  be 
(ronflnod  to  tnnir  preient  loKally-eHtahliHiiod  porta  of  f  reo  tmdo,  Uaai»<6 
und  Sanlt  Haintn  Mario,  nor  to  pincua  on  tiic  Imundary  line  wbero 
Nnoh  practiccH  havo  lon^  Itoon  winkml  at ;  but  tho  iiinuirKlAr'i)  art 
vronld  b«  Htudiod  by  uvorybody  and  evorywhoro  ({ratefnlly  patron- 
iiod. 

In  all  the  di  veraiflod  oomplioations  of  thin  propoMMl  treaty,  a  careful 
Hcmtluy  will  ithow  that  not  one  of  tho  proviiiionH  Htaniling  Htark 
ulone  conld  be  ai'cented  on  itii  merits.  Home  would  prove  dlaaatnma 
to  our  intereata,  and  the  l>eiit  are  palpably  unequal ;  but  it  in  oertaiii 
that  the  character  of  the  whole  In  not  improved  by  the  multiplicity 
of  Its  narta,  and  equally  certain  that  if  any  one  of  its  parts  would 
prove  uisaatrouR,  that  fact  ihonld  turn  the  itcale  agaiuHi  the  treaty. 

Treaties  are  merely  bargains  between  sovereignties,  where  the  peo- 
ple for  the  most  part  are  unrepresented,  and  the  onlv  legitimate  mode 
of  changing  tariff  laws  is  for  the  legislative  authority  to  decide  from 
time  to  time  what  articles  of  commerce  shall  or  shall  not  be  subject 
to  duties,  without  the  restraint  of  any  side  bargains  with  foreign 
powers. 

After  a  full  examination  of  the  proposed  treaty,  the  conclusion 
wonld  seem  to  l>e  unavoidable  that,  so  long  as  the  Canadas  are  bound 
to  oonsnlt  the  interests  and  supremacy  of  the  imperial  government, 
it  is  and  will  be  impossible  for  them  to  otTer  any  terms  of  reciprocity 
which  can  be  to  the  advantage  of  the  United  States  to  accept.  Doing 
the  best  that  can  be  done,  yet  the  reciprocity  with  the  Canadaa  which 
snitfl  great  Britain  would  not  suit  us,  or,  if  it  suited  us,  could  not  suit 
Qreat  Britain.  It  is  an  unequal  commercial  triangle  which  cannot  bo 
squared.  We  can  do  nothing  for  the  Canadas  that  we  are  not  ready 
to  do  for  the  world  at  large. 

The  proposals  now  oftere«l,  whether  relating  to  our  future  oommer- 
eial  timft  or  to  the  problems  of  higher  concern  to  statesmen,  are 
delnaive  and  wholly  inadmissible.  We  have  no  revenue  to  part  with, 
and  If  we  had,  could  not  afford  to  squander  gifts  of  vastly  greater 
magnitude  than  all  we  are  to  receive  in  return.  Our  farmem  feel  a 
profound  interest  in  the  Oovomment  they  support,  and  they  expect 
the  Oovemment  to  reciprocate  that  interest  by  more  regard  than  is 
to  1)6  extended  to  the  farmers  of  any  other  country,  who  have  noth- 
ing at  stake  but  the  profits  and  loss  of  trade ;  and  onr  manufaoturera 
do  not  wish  to  meet  Great  Britain  when  they  are  nominally  invited 
to  meet  the  Canadas,  or  to  lire  with  Leah  for  twenty-four  years 
when  they  only  love  Rachel.  Onr  national  patrimony  should  not 
be  shared  with  the  Canadas  so  long  as  they  cling  to  sreater  expecta- 
tions from  other  foreign  relations.  The  sternest  dictates  of  pm- 
denoe  require  ns  to  stand  by  the  ancient  usage  of  the  Senate— deny- 
ing all  authority  to  make  reciprocity  treaties,  whether  favorable  or 
unflivorable,  and  especially  to  decline  all  diplomatic  arrangements 
by  which  our  own  people  are  to  be  despoile<l  for  the  benefit  of  Brit- 
iHii  snbjects  and  at  the  expense  of  the  Constitntion. 


"1 


■*w 


